As president, Donald Trump would sell off $16 trillion worth of U.S. government assets in order to fulfill his pledge to eliminate the national debt in eight years, senior adviser with the campaign Barry Bennett said.
“The United States government owns more real estate than anybody else, more land than anybody else, more energy than anybody else,” Bennett told Chris Jansing Sunday on MSNBC. “We can get rid of government buildings we’re not using, we can extract the energy from government lands, we can do all kinds of things to extract value from the assets that we hold.”
In a wide-ranging interview with The Washington Post, Trump said he would get rid of the $19 trillion national debt “over a period of eight years.” The article noted that most economists would consider Trump’s proposal impossible, as it could require slashing the annual federal budget by more than half.
Glenn Kessler, who writes the Post’s Fact Checker column, deemed the plan “nonsensical” and gave it “Four Pinocchios.” Kessler assessed that even if Trump were to eliminate every government function and shut down every Cabinet agency, he would still be short $16 trillion.
“We regret we have only Four Pinocchios to give for this whopper,” Kessler said. “Trump is insulting the intelligence of Americans for making such a claim in the first place.”
However, when pressed on whether the United States could sell off $16 trillion worth of assets, Bennett responded affirmatively on Sunday.
“Oh, my goodness,” he said. “Do you know how much land we have? You know how much oil is off shore? And in government lands? Easily.”
Reality
Under the Constitution the only land the Feds own is D.C., the ports, and military bases. The rest is owned by the States or private ownership. Read the Constitution Donald.
According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, as of September 2015 the federal government’s assets totaled $3.2 trillion. However, that does not include include stewardship assets or natural resources which are not valued.
Trump is also missing the point that the federal budget is already running a deficit. So before Trump can start paying down the debt, he needs to eliminate the deficit — which year after year, is adding to the national debt owed to bondholders.
In conclusion, if you have $19 trillion, subtract $3.2 trillion, you are left with $15.8 trillion. Math is math, and Trump’s doesn’t add up.
During a Wisconsin Town Hall with Fox News’s Greta Van Susteren, Trump again repeated comments long debunked, and never addressing those criticisms.
On immigration, Trump says he is “totally in favor of immigration” but people have to come in legally. He says he will build a wall and Mexico will pay for it. “It’ll be so easy,”
To much applause from the Fox News audience, Trump went on to claim it would take around $10 billion to build.
The claim that he can use a trade deficit with Mexico to force them to pay for a wall should enlighten you that Donald Trump does not understand how the world works. A trade deficit, which is also referred to as net exports, is an economic condition that occurs when a country is importing more goods than it is exporting.
The deficit equals the value of goods being imported minus the value of goods being exported, and it is given in the currency of the country in question. For example, assume that the United States imports from Mexico $800 billion dollars worth of goods, while exporting to Mexico only $750 billion dollars. In this example, the trade deficit, or net exports, with Mexico would be $50 million dollars.
In our example the holder of that $50 million dollars is the private (and probably some public) companies operating in Mexico, not the Mexican government. Essentially Trump is demanding that the Mexican government to pay for a wall with money that he should know it doesn’t have ownership of.
Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump on Thursday doubled down on his promise to not rule out using nuclear weapons in Europe.
“I don’t want to take cards off the table; I’d never do that,” Trump said during a phone interview on “The O’Reilly Factor,” adding, “the last person to press that button would be me.”
Guest host Eric Bolling acknowledged not ruling out using nuclear weapons against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), but he pressed Trump about the possibility of using them in Europe.
“Europe is a big place. I’m not going to take cards off the table,” Trump said.
Trump raised eyebrows Wednesday for insisting during a town hall on MSNBC that he wouldn’t take nukes off the table in any situation, including in Europe.
The businessman has argued that he wants to remain unpredictable on foreign policy matters and has suggested a U.S. military presence in Japan and South Korea be replaced by their own nuclear arsenals.
White House deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes said Thursday it’d be “catastrophic” if countries like Japan and South Korea obtained nuclear weapons, citing opposition to nuclear proliferation.
During his Fox News interview, Trump appeared to tout his opposition to the Iraq War in an attempt to cast himself as cautious on major foreign policy decisions.
“The last person that wants to play the nuclear card, believe me, is me,” Trump said.
Reality
Yes, Europe is a big place. That we can agree on.
Current US nuclear policy says we will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear opponents. That has been US policy for about a half-century. Just because that is policy doesn’t mean it is a great idea or anything, but what it does mean is that before you throw that policy under the bus, a policy which undergirds many of our defense alliances, you need to have some really good reason for doing so. “Not taking any cards off the table” is not such a reason.
This policy, as well as the nuclear non-proliferation policy, which tries to keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of new countries, such as Iran, has helped to keep nuclear weapons from being used for over 65 years. Allowing new countries to obtain nuclear weapons would be bad to destabilizing in some cases.
Also side note, at the 2 minute mark in the media clip below Eric Boling admits to taking orders from the RNC.
Donald J. Trump said that women who seek abortions should be subject to “some form of punishment” if the procedure is banned in the United States, further elevating Republican concerns that his explosive remarks about women could doom the party in the fall.
The comment, which Mr. Trump later recanted, attracted instant, bipartisan criticism — the latest in a series of high-profile episodes that have shined a light on Mr. Trump’s feeble approval ratings among women nationally.
In this case, Mr. Trump also ran afoul of conservative doctrine, with opponents of abortion rights immediately castigating him for suggesting that those who receive abortions — and not merely those who perform them — should be punished if the practice is outlawed.
The statement came as Mr. Trump appeared at a town-hall-style forum with Chris Matthews of MSNBC, recorded for broadcast on Wednesday night. Mr. Matthews pressed Mr. Trump, who once supported abortion rights, on his calls to ban the procedure, asking how he might enforce such a restriction.
“You go back to a position like they had where they would perhaps go to illegal places,” Mr. Trump said, after initially deflecting questions. “But you have to ban it.”
He added, after a bit more prodding, “There has to be some form of punishment.”
Hours later, Mr. Trump recanted his remarks, essentially in full, a rare and remarkable shift for a candidate who proudly extols his unwillingness to apologize or bow to “political correctness.”
If abortion were disallowed, he said in a statement, “the doctor or any other person performing this illegal act upon a woman would be held legally responsible, not the woman.”
“The woman is a victim in this case, as is the life in her womb,” he continued.
Reality
Donald Trump manged to anger literally every single person in the abortion debate. He upset the pro-choicers by being pro-life and his misogynistic stance to blame the woman, he upset some pro-lifers for going too far, and finally he upset the other pro-lifers for not going far enough.
Bravo, sir. Bravo.
This isn’t the first time Donald Trump flip-flopped on the abortion issue. For example in 1999 he told Meet the Press he was “very pro-choice“.
Donald Trump refused to take the use of nuclear weapons off the table in any situation, including in Europe or the Middle East, during a wide-ranging town hall on MSNBC.
The GOP presidential front-runner said he would consider using a nuclear weapon if the U.S. were attacked by the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, according to an MSNBC transcript of the interview released Wednesday afternoon.
“Somebody hits us within ISIS, you wouldn’t fight back with a nuke?” he said.
When host Chris Matthews asked if the real estate mogul could definitively say he wouldn’t use nuclear weapons, he responded: “I would never say that. I would never take any of my cards off the table.”
Matthews pressed him, asking if he would consider using nuclear weapons in Europe.
“No, I don’t think so,” Trump said, but he again said he wouldn’t definitively write off the option.
In a New York Times interview published over the weekend, Trump stressed the importance of unpredictability in his foreign policy. He told Matthews Wednesday that “you’d be a bad negotiator” for taking any strategy off the table.
He called nuclear weapons “sort of like the end of the ball game.”
“I’m not going to use nuclear, but I’m not taking any cards off the table,” he said.
Reality
The world freaked the fuck out upon hearing a candidate for the President of the United States was willing to use nuclear weapons against them should terrorists be found on their soil.
Japan, a country with a pacific constitution and knows first hand the power of nuclear weapons, was so concerned, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe felt the need to respond publicly, saying, “whoever will become the next president of the United States, the Japan-U.S. alliance is the cornerstone of Japan’s diplomacy.”
South Korea, a country technically at war with the nuclear state North Korea, just had to deal with an H-bomb test by North Korea just a few weeks prior. This would not be the best time to threaten to pull out troops. The South Korean government reaction has been more focused on Trump’s assertion that South Korea is not paying its way. Furthermore Daniel Pinkston of Troy University said it would play into North Korea’s hands. “The hardliners in Pyongyang would just love such an outcome because if that were to occur, it would completely justify their nuclear status … and validate Kim Jong Un’s policy line as absolutely brilliant and absolutely correct.”
For the record, Japan spends more than $2 billion a year for the privilege of hosting U.S. forces, while South Korea pays close to $900 million, meaning it’s cheaper to the U.S. to keep our forces there than bring them home.
Donald Trump said that his proposed ban on Muslims entering the country may have the effect of motivating them to fight ISIS in order to attempt to return to the U.S. at some point.
Trump made the statement during an MSNBC town hall, when the GOP presidential front-runner was asked by Chris Matthews about the temporary ban he suggested in December.
Asked if Muslims would be more ill-disposed to fighting ISIS if a ban was imposed.
“I don’t know, maybe they’ll be more disposed to fight ISIS,” Trump said. “Maybe they’ll say, ‘We want to come back into America, we’ve got to solve this problem.'”
Here is the entire exchange:
MATTHEWS: But there’s 1.6 billion Muslims in the world. And they’re all getting the message from Donald Trump, who’s leading the fight for the Republican nomination for president, saying, “Stay out of my country.”
How does that encourage them to fight ISIS?
TRUMP: Chris (inaudible).
MATTHEWS: How does that encourage them to fight the bad guys?
TRUMP: OK, let me explain (inaudible). They have a problem too. They have a big problem.
MATTHEWS: But if we say “Go away…”
TRUMP: I have been told by more (inaudible) who are saying, “What are you doing is a great thing, not a bad thing.” The two people in San Bernardino…
MATTHEWS: Are any Muslims telling you that?
TRUMP: I have actually — believe it or not, I have a lot of friends that are Muslim and they call me.
MATTHEWS: Right.
TRUMP: In most cases, they’re very rich Muslims, OK?
(LAUGHTER)
MATTHEWS: But do they get in the country?
TRUMP: But they do call me. They’ll come in.
MATTHEWS: How do you let them in?
TRUMP: They’ll come in. And you’ll have exceptions.
MATTHEWS: But you…
TRUMP: Wait, wait, wait. Look, Chris, Chris, with the San Bernardino situation…
MATTHEWS: Right.
TRUMP: … many people saw that apartment with bombs all over the apartment…
MATTHEWS: Yeah, I agree with that.
TRUMP: … bombs on table.
MATTHEWS: You see something, say something.
TRUMP: Not one person…
MATTHEWS: I know.
TRUMP: … with all the people that said — they said it’s racial profiling. That’s why they didn’t call. You know why they said that? Because some lawyer said, “You know, you saw this, you better come up with a good excuse.” They said it’s racial profiling. A lot of people saw what was going on in that apartment. Not one Muslim, OK?
MATTHEWS: I’m with you on this. Of course I’m with you. But that’s not the question.
TRUMP: OK. Why didn’t they report ’em?
MATTHEWS: Look, look, you’re saying ban…
TRUMP: In other words, why — but Chris, why don’t they report ’em?
MATTHEWS: OK. You say ban them from entering the country. They get the message. Everyone in the world — over 1.6 — in Indonesia, Pakistan, everywhere. In Albania. Anywhere there’s Muslims, you know, they know you don’t want them. So they get the message. They’re a little more ill-disposed to fight ISIS, a little bit more after that once they say, “The Americans don’t even like us,” don’t you think?
TRUMP: I don’t know, maybe they’ll be more disposed to fight ISIS. Maybe they’ll say, “We want to come back into America, we’ve got to solve this problem.”
MATTHEWS: OK.
TRUMP: I’m serious about that. Maybe they’ll be…
Reality
Trump’s flip-flop on banning all Muslims is a proposal to create a 2-class system, those who are rich enough to afford to get past his ban and the rest who would be forced into military service to fight ISIS. This is interesting to note to the Trump supporters who believe that he would help out the common man when it is very clear from remarks like these that his views favor the wealthy.
I think Republican House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce, whose district includes parts of San Bernardino County, which suffered a deadly terrorist attack in December, said it best later in the day:
I think the thought we could have a religious test [for entrants] would be unconstitutional.
[But] we need to address the problem in terms of foreign fighters who might come back in the United States,” the congressman said in a “Squawk Box” interview. “We need to vet people who come in.”
Donald Trump has refused to rule out dropping a nuclear bomb on Europe, saying he is not willing to “take any cards off the table”.
In an MSNBC interview which has already made headline for Mr Trump’s comments on punishing women for having abortions, the presidential candidate said if the US wasn’t willing to use its nuclear weapons, “why are we making them?”
Mr Trump did say he “would be the last one to use the nuclear weapons” and added his now-familiar line that he was “against Iraq” – which is not strictly the case.
“I would be very, very slow to pull that trigger,” Mr Trump said. “[But] if someone hits us with a nuke, you wouldn’t fight back with a nuke?”
Here’s the exchange with Chris Matthews in full:
Donald Trump: “First of all, you don’t want to say take everything off the table because you would be a bad negotiator if you do that.
Chris Matthews: “Just nuclear?”
DT: “Look, nuclear should be off the table, but would there be a time that it could be used? Possibly.”
CM: “The problem is when you say that, the whole world heard that. David Cameron heard that in Britain, the Japanese where we bombed them in ’45 heard it. They are hearing a guy running for President of the United States talking about maybe using nuclear weapons. Nobody wants to hear that about an American president.”
DT: “Then why are we are making them? Why do we make them?”
Which countries have nuclear weapons?
CM: “Because of the old mutually assured destruction, which Reagan hated and tried to get rid of.”
DT: “I was against Iraq, I would be the last one to use the nuclear weapons because that’s sort of like the end of the ball game.”
CM: “Can you tell the Middle East we’re not using nuclear weapons?”
DT: “I would never say that. I would never take any of my cards off the table.”
CM: “How about Europe? We won’t use in Europe?”
DT: “I’m not going to take it off the table for anybody.”
CM: “You’re going to use it in Europe?”
DT: “No! I don’t think so. But…”
CM: “Just say it, say ‘I’m not going to use a nuclear weapon in Europe’.”
DT: “I am not taking cards off the table. I’m not going to use nukes – but I’m not taking any cards off the table.”
CM: “The trouble is, the sane people hear you, and the insane people are not affected by your threats. The real fanatics say good, keep it up.”
DT: “I think they are more affected than you think.”
Earlier this week, Mr Trump struggled with another question on the nuclear issue when he was asked by right-wing radio host Hugh Hewitt which of the US’s “triad” of weapons – by land, by sea or by air – was in most urgent need of an upgrade.
The candidate appeared not to understand the question, even when it was repeated, eventually responding: “I think – I think, for me, nuclear is just the power, the devastation is very important to me.”
David Cameron has previously said he would be willing to use nuclear bombs if an attack was “justified”, describing them as “the ultimate insurance policy”.
He was speaking in October last year, after opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn said he could conceive of no circumstances in which he would order the use of a nuclear weapon.
Let’s just let this sink in for a moment. A leading candidate for the Presidency of the United States of America said that using a nuclear weapon in Europe is not off the table. That immediately put our allies in Europe on edge.
Days after sparking a firestorm of criticism for his comments on abortion, Donald Trump says laws regarding abortions should remain as they are.
“At this moment the laws are set. And I think we have to leave it that way,” Trump told CBS’ “Face the Nation” host John Dickerson in an interview that will air Sunday.
“The laws are set now on abortion and that’s the way they’re going to remain until they’re changed,” Trump said at another point in the interview.
Hours after the excerpt of the new interview was released, Trump campaign spokesperson Hope Hicks denied that Trump’s comments amounted to a reversal.
“Mr. Trump gave an accurate account of the law as it is today and made clear it must stay that way now —until he is President,” Hicks said. “Then he will change the law through his judicial appointments and allow the states to protect the unborn. There is nothing new or different here.”
Reality
Actually this is the third position Donald Trump has taken this week. Usually politicians space out their flip-flops to give them a higher probably for a successful denial.
It’s a tradition for The New York Times to have a 1-on-1 interview with a presidential candidate to dig deep into their foreign policy positions so the public can come away with a better understanding. This usually happens much later in the race but this year however is not usual as the front-runner for the Republican candidacy for the President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, has little-to-none public foreign policy positions. So the Times reached out to Trump to get some info out of him and what we got was a rambling mess and some really bad ideas.
Trump would use nuclear weapons in the fight against ISIS.
Trump had no idea who the head of China is.
He is willing to pull troops from Japan and South Korea.
He believes it is okay for Japan and South Korea to develop their own nuclear weapons.
He is totally cool with Saudi Arabia collapsing if they don’t join the fight with ISIS.
Reality
Stop The Donald Trump is reading the transcript of the conversation and working on an analysis, which will be coming soon.
If you don’t have an opportunity to read the transcript allow us to sum up the conversation: Trump is asked a direct question, he rambles about nothing for 200 words, then The Times reporter asks if he can please answer the question, repeat.
Trump got many details just plain wrong. For example:
Trump had no idea who the head of China is.
That would be President Xi Jinping
Some of the ideas that Trump put forward are just outright stupid and dangerous. For example:
He is willing to pull troops from Japan and South Korea.
And then what? China and North Korea become stronger which would destabilize Asia.
He believes it is okay for Japan and South Korea to develop their own nuclear weapons.
And then what? Now we have an arms race in Asia, exactly what we’ve been trying to avoid for the past 50 years.
He is totally cool with Saudi Arabia collapsing if they don’t join the fight with ISIS.
And then what? With no Saudi Arabia to balance the region, Iran becomes stronger.
Asked by the Fox Business Network anchor Maria Bartiromo about the feasibility of his proposal to bar foreign Muslims from entering the United States, Mr. Trump argued that Belgium and France had been blighted by the failure of Muslims in these countries to integrate.
“There is something going on, Maria,” he said. “Go to Brussels. Go to Paris. Go to different places. There is something going on and it’s not good, where they want Shariah law, where they want this, where they want things that — you know, there has to be some assimilation. There is no assimilation. There is something bad going on.”
Warming to his theme, he added that Brussels was in a particularly dire state.
“You go to Brussels — I was in Brussels a long time ago, 20 years ago, so beautiful, everything is so beautiful — it’s like living in a hellhole right now,”
Trump went on to promote war crimes as a reasonable response.
“Frankly, the waterboarding, if it was up to me, and if we changed the laws or had the laws, waterboarding would be fine,” Trump said. “If they could expand the laws, I would do a lot more than waterboarding. You have to get the information from these people.” He continued, “I am in the camp where you have to get the information and you have to get it rapidly.”
Reality
Torture is illegal, unethical, and simplydoesnotwork. When a subject is in pain, people will say anything to get the pain to stop. Most of the time, they will lie, make up anything to make you stop hurting them. That means the information provided during the time of torture is useless. It is irresponsible to forget the lessons we learned during the war against terror for Donald Trump to suggest a war crime.
Furthermore Trump’s hellhole comment was tasteless during a time of mourning and should highlight his repeated failures at foreign policy. His comments about the city inspired quite a backlash on social media, with Brussels denizens using the hashtag #hellhole, to defend their city.
