Connect with us

Everything

The strong man cracked

Published

on

It is difficult for this writer to admit, but he voted for Donald Trump for President. Not because he thought Mr. Trump the best man (that role was reserved for Ted Cruz), but because he could not stand the idea of listening to Hillary Clinton screeching into every available microphone every damn day. It was a selfish and foolish vote and it has turned your faithful correspondent completely against politics.

Donald Trump was elected partially on the idea that he was a strong man. A man who takes a position and doesn’t back down. The Left would have had the voter believe that he was a modern Mussolini with odd colored hair and his supporters portrayed him as a modern Theodore Roosevelt or Andrew Jackson who had never been to war, been to a hunt, or had hardly gotten out of the New York/Florida circuit.

There was a brief moment when it looked as if Mr. Trump may have been a man of principle, and that moment was when he talked to the president of the Republic of China, aka Taiwan, Tsai Ing-wen before he talked to the leader of the Peoples Republic of China, President Xi. Of course Chinese Communists threw a fit over the matter stating that President Trump was violating the One China Policy that was established by Richard Nixon and insisting that the One China Policy was United States law when, in fact, it is a casual policy established by Nixon and maintained by later presidents. It is a presidential policy and not a law.

And for that brief moment it looked like President Trump was a strong man. He looked as if he was willing to stand up to the greatest threat in the Pacific and establish a close and favorable relationship with Taiwan and put an end to the nonsensical One China Policy. It looked that President Trump would stand up to the encroachments and bullying of Communist China, and it was a beautiful thing to watch the pronouncements from Peking (Beijing, Peiping) as the sputtered in helpless rage and frustration at the fact that they had been ignored in favor of a nation (as corrupt as it may be) with a democratically elected government that is actually pretty entertaining with fist-fights on the floor of the parliament a not unusual occurrence.

But that moment was deigned not to last very long and The President and his spokespeople soon got with the normal program and announced that the One China Policy was still in effect. Probably due to the occupiers of the China desk in the State Department (a questionable bunch, to say the least; almost all influenced by Edgar Snow), President Trump cracked. The strong man, the man with strong opinions and answers, started to crumble and show himself that he is the very type of politician that many of the people who voted for him is the very person they would have voted against if he had shown the weakness that he has shown regarding Taiwan.

Taiwan was the first crack in the armor for the President’s strong man image. Others have followed on a regular basis. Soon the man will show himself as a man of no principle because he talent is “making a deal.”

It should be interesting to see what happens when Mr. Trump meets President Xi. Don’t be surprised if it results in a singing of The East Is Red.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Immigration

Will Trump suspend the Constitution to build his wall?

Published

on

Will Trump suspend the Constitution to build his wall

What do martial law, illegal immigration, and using the military as a national police force have in common with Barack Obama and Donald Trump? Possibly more than you realize.

After years of failing to fix the illegal immigration problem and Obama’s abuse of executive orders, there were conspiracy theories being spread by people like Alex Jones at InfoWars.com that Obama was laying the groundwork to declare martial law and cancel the 2016 election.

Of course, that never happened, although I sometimes wish it had (just kidding, no letters please). But with the obvious assault on our Constitutionally protected, God-given rights increasing with every passing day, and with Trump’s ignorance of the Constitution, we need to ask ourselves if something like that could still happen.

Trump convinced America to vote for him in 2016 based on his promise to build a “big beautiful wall” on our southern border and have Mexico pay for it. Yet, after two years, no such wall exists, and Mexico has let Trump know in no uncertain terms they have no intention of financing one.

As a result, all of the problems associated with illegal immigration not only still exist, but they’ve gotten worse. On top of that, Trump is busy gearing up for another four years as president … or more.

Trump has often joked about being president beyond the Constitutionally allowed eight years, but recent comments about his border wall would seem to indicate that he’s not all that concerned about any limitations placed on him by the Constitution he once called “archaic.”

On Tuesday, Trump bragged about the success he was having with the wall even though it doesn’t exist while issuing this threat. “If the Democrats do not give us the votes to secure our Country, the Military will build … the Wall.”

In essence, Trump is saying that he will play the role of dictator by ignoring Congress and using the military to force his will, a threat he also made earlier this year.

Such an action would turn the military into a national police force, but it would also require some manipulation of the Constitution. Trump can’t simply shift Border Security funds from the Department of Homeland Security to the military without Congress, unless he declares a national emergency.

Such a declaration would suspend the limits placed on the president by the Constitution and allow him to use the military as he sees fit without Congressional approval such as he did when he sent thousands of troops to the border to deal with the migrant caravan in October.

In a survey released in the summer of 2017, a majority (52%) of respondents supported the idea of postponing the 2020 election if Trump needed to declare a national emergency to deal with the immigration problem.

It looks like Trump might just take them up on the offer.

Originally posted on StridentConservative.com.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook.

Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading

News

Shooting near West Bank settlement kills at least 2 Israelis

Published

on

Shooting near West Bank settlement kills at least 2 Israelis

JERUSALEM (AP) — A shooting attack near a West Bank settlement on Thursday killed at least two Israelis and critically wounded another two, Israel’s rescue service said.

The deaths extend a violent week that began with a shooting outside a West Bank settlement on Sunday, resulting in the death of a baby who was delivered prematurely following the weekend attack, and continued with the killing of two Palestinians wanted in that and another attack on Israelis in the West Bank.

Eli Bin, the head of Israel’s Magen David Adom service, told Israeli Army Radio that two people were killed in the shooting, which occurred at a location about a ten-minute drive south from the place of Sunday’s attack. Their identities were not immediately known.

A later statement from the service said paramedics arrived at a bus stop to find four “youngsters” with gunshot wounds.

Israeli media reported that a passing car opened fire outside the settlement, but it was not clear if the gunmen had fled the scene or were stopped. The Israeli military had no additional information.

While the West Bank experiences occasional deadly violence, often between Israeli troops and Palestinian protesters, much of the Israeli-Palestinian violence in recent months has been limited to the Gaza Strip, where some 175 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli fire in border protests.

“In recent days, we definitely feel like the situation (in the West Bank) is getting worse,” Shalom Galil, a paramedic who assisted at the scene of the shooting, told Israeli Army Radio.

The shooting comes hours after Israeli security forces tracked down and killed a Palestinian accused of killing two Israelis.

Israeli police said Ashraf Naalweh was found armed near the West Bank city of Nablus and was killed during an arrest raid.

Israel accuses Naalweh of shooting to death two Israelis and wounding another at an attack on a West Bank industrial zone in October. He fled the scene and Israeli forces have been searching for him since.

“Israel’s long arm will reach anyone who harms Israeli citizens,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said.

Police said it had made a number of arrests in its attempt to hunt down Naalweh and suspected he was planning on carrying out another attack.

On Wednesday, Israeli forces killed Salah Barghouti, a Palestinian suspect wanted in the drive-by shooting earlier this week at a West Bank bus stop.

In Sunday night’s attack, assailants in a Palestinian vehicle opened fire at a bus stop outside a West Bank settlement, wounding seven people, including a 21-year-old pregnant woman, before speeding away.

The militant Hamas group that rules the Gaza Strip said that both Barghouti and Naalweh were its members but stopped short of claiming responsibility for the attacks the two carried out.

“The flame of resistance in the (West) Bank will remain alive until the occupation is defeated on all our land,” Hamas said.

Also Thursday, police said an assailant stabbed two officers in Jerusalem’s Old City, wounding them lightly. The officers opened fire on the attacker and he was killed, spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said.

Police identified the man as a 26-year-old Palestinian from the West Bank. It released security camera footage that shows the man lunging toward the officers and appearing to stab them.

Continue Reading

Politics

The administrative state is far too powerful

Published

on

The administrative state is far too powerful

The administrative state is essentially a loophole in government that gives citizens no recourse. We don’t elect them. We can’t expect Congress to do its job. What are we supposed to do?

Philip Hamburger took to PragerU to deliver one of the most important talks the channel has had in a while. The dangers inherent to unelected bureaucrats and their fiefdoms is real and must be addressed now.

We can’t vote them out. Capitol Hill has abdicated. The founding fathers would be ashamed of the administrative state that holds too much control. Philip Hamburger and PragerU have made a must-watch video. The question is, how do we fix this?

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report