Had he NOT spoken so harshly about the Federal judge in Washington (state), and had he zipped is lip while the government’s appeal was in progress, maybe the three Federal judges reviewing the earlier judge’s decision might have overturned the initial decision.
But “his mouth runneth over.”
IN MY OPINION, I think the president’s executive order was correct and legal. I am not a lawyer or Constitutional scholar, but I do know a little U.S. history.
FDR (a) interred Japanese Americans and, to a far lesser extent, German-Americans and Italian-Americans during WW 2 and (b) refused nearly 1000 Jews escaping Hitler’s murderers from landing on U.S. shores, claiming there might be nazi spies among them.
Trumps immediate predecessor in the White House banned all people from more predominately Muslim countries for six months — three months longer than Trumps ban on all refugees from only seven Muslim-dominated countries.
Does anyone recall street protests on the ex-president’s action?
There is more “banning” history at Good for the goose
But not for the gander elsewhere on this blog site.
Trump’s rhetoric often is akin to pouring gasoline on a smoldering fire. For the president, it not is WHAT he says — or “tweets” — but HOW he expresses himself.
In a presidential way he told Boeing that a new presidential plane was too costly. Boeing renegotiated the price. Unlike some other “wins” claimed by the president — notably convincing auto makers to keep production in the U.S.; GM’s president is reported as saying she planned to keep jobs here, anyway — Trump seems to be preparing for new negotiations with other governments: China — a country that “owns” the U.S. through loans and the cheap, government subsidized products; Cuba — a no-win situation as Cubans in the U.S. are divided: to open trade or to embargo Cuban goods; Mexico — the U.S. ALREADY (under an agreement with Trump’s predecessor) is paying for a wall to protect Mexico from incursions into the country across its southern border.
While the United Nations hardly is a country, Trump may follow Congressional majority opinion and reduce the U.S.’ financial support.
He is doing what he promised to do before the election.
But sometimes ….
His twitter slam on Nordstrom — and other stores following Nordstrom’s lead — for dumping daughter Ivanka's clothing and accessories line may be justified, but the questions are: (a) was it necessary and (b) does Ivanka need daddy to “whip” the retailer into line. Nordstrom claims the (suddenly, post-election??) the woman’s label wasn’t selling?
- Looking at Nordstrom locations, I suspect that the store really DID note a decline in Trump sales … its customers hardly are the “despicables” Hillary Clinton so disparaged. Interestingly, Ms. Trump resigned her position with the line before Nordstrom “dumped Trump.”
Neiman Marcus, as well as the online stores Belk, Jet, and ShopStyle, all have distanced themselves from her brand. Kmart and its subsidiary Sears, later joined the “dump Trump” parade.
Some other retailers, while not “dumping Trump” stopped promoting the line.
While the Trump line may have been banished from several “name” stores, her products still can be found at a number of stores.
Trump needs to learn to “pick his battles.” There are times to simply ignore things. Trump twitters often seem like Chicken Little screaming “The sky is falling.”
As president, he must learn that he need NOT offer his comments on anything and everything — often his tweets are based on knee jerk reactions and lack a basis in fact.
I can understand Trump Twitters over a proven biased leftist media, but he needs to show some restraint.
Some of his tweets inflame when inappropriate; some of his tweets, e.g., those about Nordstrom et al and Ivanka, sound like a whine. He might have done better by inviting the retailers’ CEOs to a sit down at Trump Towers or, if they prefer, at the White House.
Free advice to President Trump: Pick your battles. Say (tweet) a little less and consider your words carefully.
You are the president now; act accordingly.