Trump Flip-Flops on North Carolina Transgender Bathroom Bill

Donald Trump answers questions on transgender bathroom use.

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is tweaking his stance on North Carolina’s transgender bathroom law less than a day after he voiced his opposition to the legislation and suggested the state should just “leave it the way it is.”

“I love North Carolina, and they have a law, and it’s a law that, you know, unfortunately is causing them some problems,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity in an interview Thursday night. “And I fully understand that they want to go through, but they are losing business, and they are having people come out against.”

“I think that local communities and states should make the decision,” he went on to say. “And I feel very strongly about that. The federal government should not be involved.”

“In other words, let the state decide,” Hannity responded. “Kind of like your positions on education, give it back to the states.”

“Yeah, let them decide,” Trump said. “Absolutely.”

Reality

Trump has been flip-flopping on more and more issues lately. This is probably because he caught heat from the far-right wing of the Republican party for not being as insensitive as he usually is.

The North Carolina bathroom bill is a solution in search of a problem. There have been 0 reported cases of sexual assault by transgender individuals in public bathrooms. Coincidentally there have been 3 cases of Republican lawmakers arrested for sexual assault in a public bathroom.

Trump Terrifies World Leaders

Politico President Barack Obama is trying but failing to reassure foreign leaders convinced that Donald Trump will be the next president of the United States. They’re in full-boil panic.

According to more than two dozen U.S. and foreign-government officials, Trump has become the starting point for what feels like every government-to-government interaction. In meetings, private dinners and phone calls, world leaders are urgently seeking explanations from Obama and Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry, Defense Secretary Ash Carter and Trade Representative Michael Froman on down. American ambassadors are asking for guidance from Washington about what they’re supposed to say.

“They’re scared and they’re trying to understand how real this is,” said one American official in touch with foreign leaders. “They all ask. They follow our politics with excruciating detail. They ask: ‘What is this Trump phenomenon? Can he really win? What would it mean for U.S. policy going forward or U.S. engagement in the world?’ They’re all sort of incredulous.”

Obama hears world leaders’ fears about the Republican front-runner so often that he has developed a speech meant to ease their nerves.

First, he walks them through the Republican primary process: Trump has had success, but there are big states yet to vote and the front-runner could still stumble. Then he explains the complications of the GOP convention and how weak rules and convoluted balloting could leave Trump a loser. And finally, Obama assures America’s allies that Hillary Clinton can defeat the Manhattan billionaire.

It’s a familiar routine but not a particularly successful one. They respond — sometimes directly to Obama and other top administration officials, sometimes stewing privately about being brushed off again — that the Obama administration has been downplaying Trump’s odds for six months.

“Most people said that he didn’t have the wit, wisdom or wealth to get very far in the primaries,” said Peter Mandelson, a member of the British Cabinet under Prime Ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, as well as a former European commissioner for trade who remains in touch with many leaders. “And they’ve been wrong.”

Now, world leaders cop to being afraid of a Trump presidency, and they’re making preparations: scrambling to get deals done with the Obama administration while they still have the chance.

Leaders, members of their governments, even their aides are so spooked that they don’t want to say anything, and many privately admit that it’s because they think he’ll win, and a quote now could mean a vengeful President Trump going after them personally next year.

“As we’re on the record, I’m rather hesitant to give you big headlines on this,” said Olli Rehn, the Finnish minister of economic affairs. “In Europe, we are concerned about the U.S. possibly turning toward a more isolationist orientation. That would not be good for United States, good for Europe, good for the world. We need the U.S. engaged in global affairs in a constructive, positive way.”

They’re not caught up in some gushy lament about what’s become of American politics, as Obama has sometimes framed the conversations when he’s talked about them publicly. They’re worried about what it means for them: for their arms deals, for their trade deals, for international funding and alliances that they depend on.

“However much people recoiled from George W. Bush or have been disappointed by Obama, they see Trump as off the Richter scale,” Mandelson said. “The reason for that is not that he must be stupid — nobody thinks that — but that he’s disdainful, unscrupulous, prepared to say anything to harvest the populist vote. And that makes people frightened.”

Then there are the more parochial concerns: that Trump’s rise will encourage and empower their own nationalists.

“Trump solutions for me are false solutions, but they’re not original. They’re things that we have heard in Europe from extremist sections,” said Sandro Gozi, a member of the Italian parliament and undersecretary for European affairs in Prime Minister Mateo Renzi’s Cabinet.

Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks did not respond to requests for comment for this story.

White House aides are bracing for more of these conversations — at the Persian Gulf leaders’ summit that wraps up in Riyadh on Thursday, a stay in London over the weekend and a trip to Germany that will include a joint meeting of Obama, Merkel, Renzi, British Prime Minister David Cameron and French President François Hollande.

“It’s not the America that they’re used to dealing with,” another senior administration official said. “Our message back to them is we’re committed to the policies we’re pursuing now. That is not going to change. A message of reassurance, but we can’t control the campaign rhetoric, the election process. But we can control what we’re doing and are committed to.”

Many governments have stepped up their requests for information from their embassies, and a number of leaders ordered up expanded briefings while in Washington for the Nuclear Security Summit.

“We are trying really to understand the different kinds of messages,” said Andris Razans, the Latvian ambassador to the United States, where Trump’s praise for Russian President Vladimir Putin has sparked fears in the media that as president he would hand Ukraine, Syria and the Baltic region to the Russian autocrat. “It is part of our daily business to understand how the picture is unfolding.”

When Razans raises questions in private about Trump, he said the Obama administration tries to assuage any concerns by saying the candidate won’t be able to follow through on his most provocative pronouncements if he lands in the White House.

“People say, ‘Well it is an election campaign and when things come down to governing after the elections, they are often changing because there are some realities that simply one has to take into account,’” Razans said.

Larger European nations have been more patient, reassured by embassies in Washington that tend to have more experience monitoring and interpreting American politics, though they are annoyed to be portrayed as useless freeloaders by Trump on NATO and other issues.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, said that during a recent congressional trip to Africa he was startled in meetings with many heads of state and their ministers “with very spotty records of their own, to put it mildly,” mentioned their shock at Trump’s success.

Representatives of Arab governments have, so far, seemed the calmest, still largely laughing off Trump and dismissing his chances.

The Israelis are walking their own weird tightrope: Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has been perennially at odds with the Obama administration, but with the prime minister condemning the Muslim ban proposal and ducking a meeting on what was supposed to be a Trump tour of the Holy Land in December — all while his U.S. ambassador and confidant, Ron Dermer, consulted with the candidate’s son-in-law, who was writing Trump’s speech to AIPAC last month.

Asked about their interactions with the Obama administration and views on Trump, Israeli Embassy spokesman Aaron Sagui declined comment altogether.

Asia-Pacific countries have long been expressing the most concern that Trump and what he represents will lead to an American withdrawal from the region, particularly on trade negotiations, that will empower China, and since Trump’s comments about the North Korean nuclear threat and other Asian issues in his extensive foreign policy interview with The New York Times last month, they’ve gotten manic.

“They want to know if this represents a fundamental change. Is this retrenchment? Retreat?” said a senior State Department official, citing “angst and concern” across the region that decades-long American commitments on security and trade might be in jeopardy.

In South Korea and Japan in particular, the official said, “there is a backlash” over Trump’s repeated — and false — assertions that those countries do not contribute financially to the U.S. security umbrella. “They take that personally.”

American officials have begun pointing to Jimmy Carter to ease frayed nerves. When he was running in 1976, then-candidate Carter pledged to pull all U.S. troops out of South Korea. He didn’t follow through. “That provoked a huge crisis in the alliance,” the State official said. “The older people remember that.”

Administration officials, though, see an upside: Trump anxiety overseas has translated to a surprising eagerness on the part of foreign governments to ink new agreements.

At the Department of Energy, which interacts daily with foreign nations to address climate change, boost the security of nuclear weapons, and cooperate on a host of civilian power projects, the deep uncertainty has translated into an unusual level of engagement, according to a top official.

“It has really focused people on getting work done with us,” said Deputy Energy Secretary Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall, citing a new high-level commission to cooperate with South Korea on nuclear energy and a formal discussion with the United Arab Emirates to build new partnerships on civil-nuclear cooperation, energy and nuclear security, and climate change.

“We come with opportunities that are serious and important to them,” Sherwood-Randall said. “They want to do everything they can to get it done.”

Rehn, the Finnish minister, pointed to the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership negotiations between the United States and the European Union. “At least on the European side, there is an effort to try to speed things up,” Rehn said.

There’s always some interest in closing up negotiations with an outgoing administration rather than waiting for a new one to get on its feet. The prospect of Trump has heightened that, said the American official who’s in touch with foreign leaders.

“They see that this is an administration that they can work with, and they don’t know what’s going to come next,” the official said.

Certainly, there’s some schadenfreude at play, too, particularly in Germany. After years of being lectured about democracy by Americans, they’re taking in over a million refugees while Trump’s talking about a ban on Muslim immigration. That say that gives them the moral high ground, and a sense of the erosion of America’s soft power in Europe.

But all over the world, leaders are trying to decipher how serious Trump is about what he’s saying. Some are convinced he’ll back away from the policies he’s espoused on the campaign trail, while others worry that he’ll have to stick to at least some of it — and for them, any percentage would be a problem. In Germany, for example, gauging Trump’s commitment to his promises is the extent to which they’ve brought him up with their American counterparts.

Gozi said allies are just as concerned about what a new world order would be like if Trump holds firm to his promises as they are if he starts to drop some of them.

“We would open a more and more complicated phase if he does what he’s saying he would do,” Gozi said. “If he doesn’t, it’ll be a big question mark.”

(h/t Politico)

Trump Would Change GOP Platform on Abortion

Donald Trump discussing abortion on Today

Donald Trump said Thursday he would change the Republican Party platform’s position on abortion to include exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother.

Trump made the remarks during a town hall on the “Today” show on NBC on Thursday morning when host Savannah Guthrie asked him about abortion exceptions.

“The Republican platform every four years has a provision that states that the right of the unborn child should not be infringed,” Guthrie said. “And it makes no exceptions for rape, for incest, for the life of the mother. Would you want to change the Republican platform to include the (abortion) exceptions that you have?”

“Yes, I would. Yes, I would. Absolutely,” Trump said. “For the three exceptions, I would.”
Currently, the Republican platform abortion policy reads: “We assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed.”

While the official party platform doesn’t explicitly outline or endorse any abortion exceptions, GOP presidential candidates in the past have supported them, including Mitt Romney, John McCain and both Bush presidents.

Among Trump’s remaining GOP presidential rivals, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz has said he opposes exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother, while Ohio Gov. John Kasich has said he supports them.

(h/t CNN)

Reality

After flip-flopping all week about his abortion position back in March, Trump’s current positions on abortion exceptions are not out of line with some of the other candidates. Trump has also stated that women who get abortions should be faced with punishment, then backtracked and said doctors should be punished. Also in his 2000 book “The America We Deserve,” Trump then wrote that he supported a woman’s right to choose. Then changed his tune to pro-file in July 2015 after declaring his candidacy.

Abortion has been legal in the United States since 1973.

The official Republican stance on abortion is very extreme as it gives zero exceptions for any reason. Historically only 15-20% of Americans are in line with the Republican party and believe abortion should be completely illegal, compared to around 50% believing that abortion should be legal in some instances, and around 30% believe it should be legal in all instances.

Links

Historical poll results on abortion.

Trump: Transgender People Can Use Whatever Bathroom They Want

Donald Trump answers questions on transgender bathroom use.

Transgender people should be able to use whatever bathroom they want, Donald Trump said Thursday.

“Oh, I had a feeling that question was going to come up, I will tell you. North Carolina did something that was very strong. And they’re paying a big price. There’s a lot of problems,” the Republican presidential candidate said during a town hall event on NBC’s “Today.”

Referring to comments from an unnamed commentator who on Wednesday said North Carolina should “leave it the way it is right now,” Trump said he agreed.

“Leave it the way it is. North Carolina, what they’re going through with all the business that’s leaving, all of the strife — and this is on both sides. Leave it the way it is,” he said, referring to companies that have canceled plans to move or expand businesses in the state as a result of the law, which bans transgender individuals from using a bathroom that does not match their gender at birth.

“There have been very few complaints the way it is. People go. They use the bathroom that they feel is appropriate,” Trump said. “There has been so little trouble. And the problem with what happened in North Carolina is the strife and the economic — I mean, the economic punishment that they’re taking.”

Matt Lauer then asked whether Trump has any transgender people working for his company.

“I really don’t know. I probably do. I really don’t know,” Trump said, answering that he would allow, say, transgender celebrity Caitlyn Jenner to use whatever bathroom she wanted at Trump Tower.

He added, “You know, there’s a big move to create new bathrooms. Problem with that is for transgender, that would be—first of all, I think that would be discriminatory in a certain way. That would be unbelievably expensive for businesses in the country. Leave it the way it is.”

(h/t Politico, Today)

Reality

Trump has been a little more progressive with LGBT rights in the past, for example allowing Jenna Talackova to compete in the 2012 Miss Universe Canada pageant, but he also is not progressive, in the same interview telling a joke comparing her name to “genitals”. He also supported amending the Civil Rights Act to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

However it is important to remember that Trump still supports traditional marriage.

Ted Cruz directly responded to Trump’s comments in a very Ted Cruz way.

Media

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fXCp8-nkTM

 

Donald Trump Skips West Bank Answer

Donald Trump took a pass when asked Thursday how he would refer to the West Bank, territory hotly contested by Israelis and Palestinians, and asked his company’s top attorney — who is Jewish — for an answer.

“Jason, how would you respond to that?” Trump said, turning to Jason Greenblatt, the chief legal officer for the Trump Organization.

The question came from a reporter with the Forward, a leading Jewish newspaper, during a meeting Trump held Thursday with two dozen reporters from Jewish and Israel-focused publications and Orthodox activists, according to the outlet.
Trump did not offer up a name for the territory. Many Israelis call the area, which their government controls, by the biblical names of Judea and Samaria, terms often embraced by pro-Israel activists and evangelical Christians.

Instead, Trump said simply that there are “many words that I’ve seen to describe it,” before deferring to Greenblatt.

The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment asking how Trump would refer to the area, home to the Palestinian Authority and a key part of the territory Palestinians claim for an independent state.

The United States government calls the territory the West Bank and successive administrations have consistently urged the Israeli government to cease new construction of Israeli settlements there, which most legal experts view as contrary to international law.

Trump’s positions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have consistently faced close scrutiny.

The question came from a reporter with the Forward, a leading Jewish newspaper, during a meeting Trump held Thursday with two dozen reporters from Jewish and Israel-focused publications and Orthodox activists, according to the outlet.

Trump did not offer up a name for the territory. Many Israelis call the area, which their government controls, by the biblical names of Judea and Samaria, terms often embraced by pro-Israel activists and evangelical Christians.

Instead, Trump said simply that there are “many words that I’ve seen to describe it,” before deferring to Greenblatt.

The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment asking how Trump would refer to the area, home to the Palestinian Authority and a key part of the territory Palestinians claim for an independent state.

The United States government calls the territory the West Bank and successive administrations have consistently urged the Israeli government to cease new construction of Israeli settlements there, which most legal experts view as contrary to international law.

Trump’s positions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have consistently faced close scrutiny.

Trump first said late last year that he would like to remain “neutral” in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in order to better negotiate a peace settlement in the decades-old conflict.

The Republican front-runner then delivered a speech before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the leading pro-Israel lobby in the U.S., during which he sought to remove any doubt about his support for the Jewish state.

Trump made no mention of his neutrality pledge, instead promising to be a stalwart partner for Israel as president and leveling a hefty critique of Palestinian society, which he claimed glorifies terrorism.

Trump hasn’t always been in line with his party’s base in answering questions on the conflict.

Speaking before an audience of Jewish Republican donors in November, Trump declined to say whether he would support recognizing Jerusalem as the undivided, undisputed capital of Israel — a position favored by Israel supporters on the right.

(h/t CNN)

Reality

We need some help understanding how this is not an embarrassment, or at least concerning.

We agree that it is reasonable to expect the President or a presidential candidate to have advisors and experts to consult with. But would it not also be equally reasonable to expect a world leader candidate to have some understanding of basic foreign policy or at least study up before publicly speaking to a group?

Can you imagine a President sitting across from Russian President Vladimir Putin and taking a pass? We can’t either.

This is yet another example of how Donald Trump is unqualified for the Presidency.

Trump Outlines Stupid Plan To Get Mexico To Pay For Border Wall

Great Wall of Trump

Donald Trump announced he would use a federal anti-terrorism surveillance law as a tool to force Mexico to pay for the border wall he has pledged to build on the U.S.’s southern border.

Trump outlined the steps his administration would undertake to compel Mexico to pay the U.S. “$5-10 billion” to fund a border wall in a memo his campaign released Tuesday morning — a plan that relies largely on threatening to bar undocumented Mexican immigrants in the United States from wiring money to relatives in Mexico.

Using a broad interpretation of the post-9/11 USA Patriot Act, Trump writes in the memo that he would threaten to issue new regulations that would compel money transfer companies like Western Union to verify a client’s identity and legal status before authorizing a wire transfer.

Trump’s plan reads just like how he talks.

  1. Day 1, broaden a provision in the Patriot Act, a (shitty) law used in the fight against terrorism, to include wire transfers. Also include a requirement that no alien may wire money outside of the United States unless the alien first provides a document establishing his lawful presence in the United States. So if you are brown skin then Trump’s plan requires you to first provide proof of citizenship to wire money to Mexico.
  2. Mexico waits 24 hours to complain. No really here is the exact quote, “On day 2 Mexico will immediately protest.” It goes on to claim without citation that “they” receive approximately $24 billion a year in remittances from Mexican nationals working in the United States, mostly from illegal aliens.
  3. Day 3, Trump publicly threatens the Mexican government to pay for the wall now, otherwise he will enact tariffs so harsh it will hurt both economies.
  4. Enact trade tariffs that will hurt both economies should the Mexican government not comply. And to quote, “Mexico needs access to our markets much more than the reverse, so we have all the leverage and will win the negotiation.”
  5. Threatens to cancel visas.
  6. Threatens to increase visa fees which Trump claims would pay for the wall all by itself.

The memo then concludes by blaming Mexico directly for crime, drugs, and the costs to the legal system from prosecution and incarceration.

Mexico has taken advantage of us in another way as well: gangs, drug traffickers and cartels have freely exploited our open borders and committed vast numbers of crimes inside the United States. The United States has borne the extraordinary daily cost of this criminal activity, including the cost of trials and incarcerations. Not to mention the even greater human cost. We have the moral high ground here, and all the leverage. It is time we use it in order to Make America Great Again.

Reality

Here’s the really stupid thing about Trump’s plan. If I’m a person who entered this country illegally, and live in this country illegally, what makes him think that I would only resort to purely legal ways of sending money back home. If a black market exists to get me here, why wouldn’t a black market exist to send my money back? And like most illegal immigrants I stay away from criminal elements, why not instead legally send a check or pre-paid Visa card in the mail? If you stop and think about each one of Trump’s proposals, it gets defeated with simple logic.

The sad fact is Donald Trump is single-handedly destroying the United State’s relationship with our 3rd largest trading partner. Our economy with Mexico is so intertwined that a goal to force economic hardships will amount to shooting ourselves in the foot. Look around your room,in your garage, or in your fridge, without a doubt you are looking at something that you purchased inexpensively and was made entirely or in part in Mexico. Now image you paid more for all of those things you see all because Donald Trump raised tariffs.

Furthermore, to bastardize an already questionable anti-terror law to require anyone who wishes to send money outside of the United States to first prove their citizenship could place an undue burden on that individual and would be difficult to prove that it is not illegal or unconstitutional.

Now about the actual cost. As we’ve discussed before, The Great Wall of Trump will not cost $10 billion but $25 billion plus $750 million every year for maintenance.  Let’s forget for a moment the illogical conclusion that blocking person-to-person money transfers will somehow effect the the Mexican government so drastically it will cause Enrique Nieto cave in and pay for a wall. Mexico does not receive $24 billion per yer in remittances as Trump claimed, but instead $19.9 billion.

There is a problem with that $19.9 billion number as it includes all remittance outflow to Mexico from both citizens and illegal immigrants. The real number, according to The World Bank for money transfers to Mexico from migrants is only $7 billion per year. It would take 4 years of unconstitutionally and magically collecting wire transfers until we would break even, and at that point the damage to both of our economies would be felt by the average American.

Links

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/05/politics/donald-trump-mexico-wall-pay/index.html

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/pay-for-the-wall

Trump Makes Up The Name of a Federal Agency He Would Axe

Republican frontrunner Donald Trump had a Rick Perry moment during a Fox News town hall Monday night when he vowed to do away with the “Department of Environmental,” an agency that does not exist.

When asked by Fox host Sean Hannity if he would eliminate any federal departments as President, Trump responded “largely, we can eliminate the Department of Education,” a common refrain among conservatives.

But he went on: “Department of Environmental, I mean, the DEP is killing us environmentally, it’s just killing our businesses.”

(h/t Talking Points Memo)

Reality

Let’s put aside for a moment that the DEP does not exist, it’s not even a correct acronym for “Department of Environmental”.

I think what Trump is referring to is the EPA, or the Environmental Protection Agency. When Trump claims that they (the EPA) are “killing us”, he has got that backwards. It is the Environmental Protection Agency who is preventing billionaire business owners, like Donald Trump, from killing us. For example:

Gaffes like this killed former Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s chances for the nomination in 2012, when he struggled to come up with the EPA as one of the three agencies he would shutter until Mitt Romney stepped in with an assist.

Instances like these help prove how unqualified Donald J. Trump is for the Presidency of the United States of America.

Devil’s Advocate

Maybe Trump is so efficient, he eliminated the department before anyone was able to hear about it?

Media

Trump’s Unusual Plan to Lower the National Debt: Sell Off Government Assets

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.

Links

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-s-unusual-plan-lower-national-debt-sell-government-n549946

Trump Repeats Debunked Wall Claims in Fox News Town Hall

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.

Reality

As we’ve documented, the Great Wall of Trump won’t be around $10 billion but instead closer to $25 billion plus maintenance costs of $750 million per year.

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.

Media

Links

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/04/03/live-updates-trump-holds-wisconsin-town-hall/

Trump Doubles Down on Nuclear Talk

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.

Media

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ct8CvM74I5k

Links

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/274862-trump-wont-rule-out-nukes-in-europe

http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2016/03/31/donald-trump-sure-might-use-nuclear/

1 354 355 356 357 358 367