The New not-so-secret service

      Trump has his own protection against attacks aside from the traditional secret service. This group of private army-like guards is led by Keith Schiller. Schiller is said to be a slow acting, distracted guard. During a trip to Ohio, a man rushed Trump which caused the secret service to react. However, Schiller took much longer to react. The secret service says this is due to his attention to kicking out potential threats prematurely. Schiller is an avid Trump supporter which makes sense. Trump will only feel safe with people around that:

1) Believe in him.

2) Are paid by Trump.

This is security to Trump. He's setting a new precedent for protection of the president. This can't be maintained past Trumps presidency because the cost of this personal security is phenomenal. During the campaign, it ranked up more than 1 million dollars. That, with the 24 hour surveillance from the New York State department, costed upwards of 35 million. 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/editorials/2016/12/21/trump-security-undercuts-secret-service/XVftdj8rHcKedaEhyK5BZP/amp.html

Angry Constituents: Now in the App Store

     Town halls across the country have been erupting with angry mobs of people with questions. And congress has actually been holding up like a champ. Due to the ambiguous nature of the Trump presidency, a lot of the decisions made are shrouded in mystery, even to his closest advisors. This is why if you asked Kellyanne Conway and Sean Spicer what Trump was doing, there would be completely different interpretations with equal amounts of grey area. 

People get this.

This is why Congress members are being asked their side of all this. The general outcry is why Trump has not been investigated, what will replace ACA, and what's going to happen to the apprentice without Trump??

 

Like I said, Congress members have been taking 60 minute+ town halls for two nights in a row just to answer their constituents dire questions. This looks very good on the Republican Party, if I'm being honest. It shows they have the stamina to lead and the dedication to make the next 4 years the best they can, if only their President wasn't the third, less funny muppet to the pair Statler and Waldorf. 

https://youtu.be/n4K_-R9h6mI
 

 

Back on Bathrooms

     A sad announcement came from the White House revoking the earlier Obama administration ruling to let transgendered children choose the bathroom that matches with their gender identity. The rationale behind the decision in the first place was to secure a place for transgender children to use the restroom comfortably, without discrimination. The Obama administration ruled this by supporting their decision with Title IX rationale of not discriminating based on sex. And to many, this made sense.

The opposing argument is that an individual could mascarada as the opposite gender to infiltrate the opposite bathroom to possibly harm another. 

I guess that makes sense, but this is not Ms. Doubtfire. That is not really happening in schools because .7% of the population identifies as transgender so having a whole bunch of dudes in wigs saying that want to be called Sandra now will raise alarms. 

What's sad is that this doesn't even make sense to repeal. Why? Why was this done? What harm was it actively providing? Were there complaints? 

This was obviously just a ploy to please the platform. For the first time in my politically aware life, I'm under a republican administration and it's annoying. 

 

https://youtu.be/TNmDduNrsZY

Let's begin, What IS Russia? (C3-1)

      Russia is technically a Federal Republic and a democracy. But MANY people doubt it's democratic nature. In reality, it's a lot like an autocracy. 

But at the same time, Russians kinda love him. 

Here is a Russian pop song solely about how all women want a man like Putin. 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zk_VszbZa_s

So would that really make Russia autocratic if people kinda love the scamp? 

Yes, is the obvious answer. People who don't love Vlad usually end up dead or missing. It's strange how opposition just drops like flies in Russia. Like in the instance of Vladimir Kara-Murza who is an opposition leader who was poisoned not once, but twice suspectedly for speaking against Putin. 

     Some of their arguments begin with the obvious low hanging liberal fruit like the anti gay laws or just the general surpression of the press. But then the more personal attacks begin. Putin makes 100,000 a year but his purchases indicate he's making way more. He is one of the richest men in the world which is how he affords shirtless photo shoots.

So, with all of this in mind, is having Russia as an ally good or bad? Well morally, it's rough, especially given our slightly more progressive social views. But if that tension was alleviated and we were both on the same page, that could be beneficial. The problem with that is that we would have to be on the same page. Donald Trump, if you believe the facts behind Russian hacking, won the presidency with help from the Russians. Donald Trump has, because of this, been quite buddy buddy with Russia. But Russia has the control in this situation. With Flynn being forced to resign, the people know that the ties to Russia aren't just associated with Trump, it's tied with the deeper government than publicly recognized.

In conclusion, having Russia as a friend could be beneficial IF we:

1) Didn't care about the Russian people's way of life.

2) Weren't under the thumb of Vladimir Putin. 

 

http://www.russia-direct.org/opinion/after-flynns-dismissal-russia-starts-doubt-trump

Rule 19 of the Senate

     Senator Elizabeth Warren was presenting her evidence as to why Trump's nominee for attorney general, Senator Jeff Sessions, is unfit for her confirmation. Warren's evidence was a letter from Coretta Scott King, saying that Jeff Sessions used his power in office to disenfranchise elderly African Americans.  Before Elizabeth Warren could finish, she was shut down by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in violation of Rule 19 in the senate which states that a senator cannot impute upon another senators character, whether directly or indirectly.

This makes absolutely no sense. How can you hold a confirmation hearing if anything you say is in violation of Rule 19? This was obviously a method of Mitch McConnell to utilize a small senate Rule to breeze right into a confirmation of Jeff sessions. 

     This created a serious platform for Elizabeth Warren to stand on. Elizabeth Warren may now be forbidden to speak on the floor, but she has taken to twitter to show her supporters she's far from silenced. 

     Mitch McConnell stands by his decision to use this rule, saying that she was warned but "Nevertheless, she persisted." Well this only gave her supporters more ammunition. Creating the hashtag #ShePersisted. Jeff sessions was later confirmed, but at a cost for republicans. 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/02/07/politics/elizabeth-warren-silenced/index.html?client=safari

Conflict of Interest Much?

     President Trump posted a scathing tweet at Nordstrom for dropping Ivanka's line of fashion. Can he do that? That's like one of the worst forms of cyber bullying that they teach you to avoid in middle school. 

     Do Trumps connections to the business world overlap in his presidency? The answer is a resounding hell yes it does. Trump delegated his businesses to his children in a semi-blind trust manor. But when he gives his family members access to government positions, how blind can he be to his ex-businesses? 

     Nordstrom replied by saying that this was not a political statement and that Ivankas line was just not performing as well, and was being discontinued at their stores. Trump turned this into a political statement and now Trump supporters are boycotting Nordstrom. But something tells me if Ivankas line wasn't performing well in Nordstrom already, they won't be losing much clientele. 

     As for other stores, they have been too scared to remove Ivanka's line, but have reduced marketing for it, by reducing signs and other forms of attention for it. 

     If the Trump brand itself has become too politicized, then there is 100% a conflict of interest. None of this is about how Ivanka is being treated "unfairly" as president Trump has claimed. 

 

Trump Assails Nordstrom for ‘Unfairly’ Dropping His Daughter Ivanka’s Line - The New York Times https://apple.news/Al8eZnQ1-SiaW017xSQQCVQ

This man is an imposter!

     Fake news, fake twitter, fake hair. This has been the political year of 2017 thus far. 

Organizations are now delegating (willingly or unwillingly) their twitter presences to outside sources to report on the actions taken by said organization. Why? Good question. Rising prices of marketing people? Still hung up on Facebook? 140 characters frustrated them? Who knows.

Whatever the case may be, unofficial official twitters have become a thing. 

In addition, there have been individuals who stand in place of an organizationto exercise their first amendment right. 

For instance there have been profiles for the Environmental protection agency, however they may be titled "Stuff the EPA can't tell you". On this twitter, they may say the things a member of the EPA would want to say, but can't. Maybe even making fun of Trump by posting climate change facts, or as Trump calls them 'opinions'. This is an easy way to represent a group of disenfranchised people and an even easier way to pair groups of people with things they agree with.

http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2017/01/27/512007632/its-not-just-the-park-service-rogue-federal-twitter-accounts-multiply