Donald Trump’s Lies About the Popular Vote

NY Times

One big fear in the weeks leading up to the presidential election was that Donald Trump would try to delegitimize the results by claiming rampant voter fraud — a bogus specter he had raised throughout the campaign, particularly as his polling numbers got worse.

In that scenario, of course, Mr. Trump was the loser. No one imagined he would say the election was rigged if he won. And yet here we are.

On Sunday, President-elect Trump unleashed a barrage of tweets complaining about calls for recounts or vote audits in several closely contested states, and culminating in this message: “In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally.”

This is a lie, part of Mr. Trump’s pattern, stretching back many years, of disregard for indisputable facts. There is no evidence of illegal voting on even a small scale anywhere in the country, let alone a systematic conspiracy involving “millions.” But this is the message that gets hammered relentlessly by right-wing propaganda sites like InfoWars, which is run by a conspiracy theorist who claims the Sandy Hook school massacre was a hoax — and whose absurdities Mr. Trump has often shouted through his megaphone, which will shortly bear the presidential seal. Mr. Trump added more fuel to the fire with the false claim of “serious voter fraud” in California, Virginia and New Hampshire — all states that went for Hillary Clinton.

In addition to insulting law-abiding voters everywhere, these lies about fraud threaten the foundations of American democracy. They have provided the justification for state voter-suppression laws around the country, and they could give the Trump administration a pretext to roll back voting rights on a national scale.

And why is Mr. Trump so hung up on the popular vote in the first place? After all, he won where it counts — in the Electoral College. And yet, in the three weeks since his victory, Mr. Trump has already admitted at least twice that he would prefer the presidency be determined by the popular vote, and not by 538 electors. It’s clear he feels threatened by Mrs. Clinton’s popular-vote lead — now more than 2.3 million and expected to exceed 2.5 million; as a percentage of the electorate, that is a wider margin than five presidents enjoyed. With support for third-party candidates added in, 54 percent of voters rejected Mr. Trump.

So maybe his touchiness is understandable. Like most people, Mr. Trump senses the fundamental unfairness of awarding the presidency to the loser of the popular vote. In fact, he made that argument himself, back on election night in 2012, calling the Electoral College “a disaster for democracy” when he believed, incorrectly, that President Obama would lose the popular vote and still win re-election. (In recent weeks he’s changed his tune, calling it a “genius” idea.) What Mr. Trump may not know, given his lack of interest in American history, is that the Electoral College was designed specifically to enhance the influence of white voters in Southern states, which were allowed to factor in their large slave populations.[...]

But if he’s truly worried about the legitimacy of the 2016 election, why doesn’t he call for a recount?

How to Manipulate Donald Trump

Slate  This week, in a volley of angry tweets, Donald Trump ridiculed the “badly defeated ... Dems,” claimed he “won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally,” and said anyone who burned the American flag should lose their citizenship or spend a year in jail. Trump’s outbursts set off alarms. How could he believe such nonsense about voter fraud? Why would a man who had just been elected president gloat, threaten protesters, and insult half the country? What’s going on in his messed-up head?

To understand Trump, you have to set aside the scripted speeches he gave before his election and the canned videos he has released since. You also have to set aside the caricature of him as a Klan-loving, Nazi-sympathizing woman hater who will deport every immigrant he can find. Instead, look at the four interviews he has given since his election: to the Wall Street Journal, 60 Minutes, the New York Times, and a group of TV anchors and executives. In these exchanges, all of them conducted outside the behavior-warping context of the campaign, you’ll see how squishy he is. Trump did run a despicable campaign, and he’s a menace to the country and the world. But it’s not because he’s a strongman. It’s because he’s a weakling. [...]

1. He’s all about reciprocal love. In the campaign, Trump often played on fear and hate. He targeted Muslims, refugees, undocumented immigrants, and any other scapegoat that served his interests. But deep down, what he wanted was the love of his adoring crowds. Emotionally, he’s a child. He can love others, but only if they love him first. And that’s how he sees his presidency. In his interview with the Times on Nov. 22, he explained that his job is “taking care of the people that really have proven to be—to love Donald Trump.”

2. His reflexes are vindictive. When Trump was down in the polls, he railed against Hillary Clinton, the press, and fellow Republicans. On election night, he said those grudges were over. But they weren’t. In post-election tweets, he berated CNN, Saturday Night Live, and the cast of Hamilton. He blasted Democrats for supporting ongoing recounts, even after they conceded the election and said they just wanted to make sure the recounts were fair. He summoned TV executives to Trump Tower on Nov. 21, called them the “dishonest media,” and scolded them for underestimating him. The next day, in his meeting with the Times, he bragged that he had stiffed job requests and pleas for campaign help from two Republican Senate candidates who had failed to support him. That’s how Trump behaves on his political honeymoon. Imagine what he’ll do when the going gets rough.

3. His ego is fragile. After winning the Republican nomination in May, Trump gloated about it for months. Now he’s gloating about the election. In tweets and interviews, he has crowed that he beat Clinton “easily.” On Tuesday, he ran another victory lap, trumpeting the addition of Michigan to his “landslide.” To understand how central this is to Trump’s sense of himself, check out the first 19 paragraphs of his interview with the Times. Invited by the publisher to give opening remarks, Trump spoke at length, not about the future but about his genius and prowess on the campaign trail. In his Nov. 11 interview with 60 Minutes, he bragged about the number of Twitter followers he had gained.

A president-elect who is self-assured doesn’t behave this way. Nor does he snap at a late-night sketch comedy show. Nor does he summon TV executives to complain that particular pictures they have aired are unflattering to him. Trump does these things because he’s deeply insecure and easily wounded.

4. He craves approval. Trump often comes across as indifferent to the feelings of others. That’s misleading. He cares intensely about being respected and loved. Consider his twisted relationship with the Times. For two weeks after the election, he tweeted that the paper was “nasty,” “failing,” and “looked like fools in their coverage of me.” Despite this, he requested a meeting and showed up at the paper’s offices to wag his tail. He promised Times staffers an immigration bill that “even the people in this room can be happy” with. He told them “it would be, to me, a great achievement if I could come back here in a year or two years … and have a lot of the folks here say, ‘You’ve done a great job.’ And I don’t mean just a conservative job, ’cause I’m not talking conservative. I mean just, we’ve done a good job.” Yes, Mr. President. Good boy.

5. He’s easily soothed by flattery. Trump is a champ at nursing grudges when he feels cheated, threatened, or disrespected. But his grudges, like his commitments, can be washed out by small doses of affection. He speaks glowingly of generous post-election phone calls he received from the Clintons and the Bushes. He has praised both families in return. Those threats to prosecute Hillary? Never mind. Trump also can’t stop clucking about his Nov. 10 meeting with President Obama. At least three times, Trump has claimed to have “great chemistry” with the man he had never previously met and had repeatedly denounced as the worst president ever. That’s how easily Trump’s wrath can turn to warmth—and vice versa.

6. He’s a softie. If Trump hurts a lot of people as president, it won’t be out of malice. Calling Clinton a “nasty woman” from the safety of a podium, or threatening a few flag burners with the same jail penalty she supported, is easy. But Trump doesn’t have the stomach to face down millions of angry Americans. On 60 Minutes, he backed away from talk of deportation, criminalizing abortions, and reopening the legal debate over same-sex marriage. If Roe v. Wade were overturned, said Trump, the worst thing women might have to endure is that “they’ll have to go to another state.” As for LGBT people, he pleaded, “I mentioned them at the Republican National Convention! And everybody said, ‘That was so great.’ ” Trump might not understand the effects of his policies or appointments, but he knows what he needs: praise. He’s not an attack dog. He wants to be petted.

7. His emotional softness makes him morally weak. Trump’s critics see him as a thug who will damage the country and the world through aggression. That could happen. But he’s far more likely to usher in bad things by being a lapdog when we need a watchdog. To take a small example: Three men who had partnered with Trump in a real estate project in India met with him after his election, took pictures with him, and posted the pictures to promote the venture. When the Times asked Trump about this, he pleaded: “What am I going to say? ‘I’m not going to talk to you’? ‘I’m not going to take pictures’? … On a human basis, you take pictures.[...]

Trump is a patsy for Russian President Vladimir Putin, too. He effused to the Journal about a “beautiful” letter Putin sent him after the election. “I would love to be able to get along with Russia,” Trump told the Times. He claimed, based on reactions at his rallies, that getting along with Russia would also make Americans happy: “I’d say this in front of thousands of people. … ‘Wouldn’t it be nice if we actually got along with Russia? Wouldn’t it be nice if we went after ISIS together?’ … And the people [would] stand up and give me a massive hand.”

Trump treats the presidency the way he treated The Apprentice: It’s all about ratings. There’s no limit to the moral lines he would cross to give the audience what it wants. In the Times interview, he said he might withdraw his support for waterboarding if it were found to be ineffective at extracting useful information. But he added: “If it’s so important to the American people, I would go for it. I would be guided by that.”

8. He substitutes popularity for standards of conduct. Trump sees the moral universe in terms of feelings, not rules or reasons. He told the Times he could combine his presidency and his business any way he chose. Anything he did to limit conflicts of interest, he asserted, would be out of the generosity of his heart. He also suggested that he didn’t have to sweat conflicts of interest because voters, by electing him, had shown they didn’t care about them. “Prior to the election it was well known that I have interests in properties all over the world,” he tweeted. “Only the crooked media makes this a big deal!”[...]

9. He confuses controversy with mystery. Because Trump deals in emotions rather than facts, he’s easily swayed by intensity. Even in matters of science, he’s more affected by the number of people who believe something than by the evidence for their beliefs. “There are few things where there’s more division than climate change,” Trump told the Times. “There are people on the other side of that issue.” He went on: “My uncle was for 35 years a professor at M.I.T. … He had feelings on this subject. It’s a very complex subject. I’m not sure anybody is ever going to really know.”[...]

10. He’s obtuse to the pain he inflicts. If Trump cares so much about feelings, why doesn’t he see all the fear and stress he has caused? Because that would require him to accept criticism, and his ego can’t handle it. On 60 Minutes, he batted away questions about his invective during the campaign, insisting that “my strongest asset is my temperament” and that he “can’t regret” anything he’d said. If some folks are upset by his election, that can’t be his fault, so it has to be theirs. “There are people, Americans, who are scared, and some of them are demonstrating right now, demonstrating against you, against your rhetoric,” Stahl told him. Trump seemed baffled. “That’s only because they don’t know me,” he said.

Trump is virtually lobotomized. Unable to acknowledge his role in stirring up hatred and fear, he blames others. When Stahl told him that “African Americans think there’s a target on their back,” and “Muslims are terrified,” he shrugged that such fears were “built up by the press, because, frankly, they’ll take every single little incident … and they’ll make [it] into an event.” In his interview with the Times, Trump claimed that low black turnout showed how popular he was: “A lot of people didn’t show up, because the African-American community liked me.” The vanity of this man is bottomless.

11. He feels the pain of his allies, not the pain of people different from him. Trump sees no need to reassure the ethnic or religious communities he targeted in the campaign. On Nov. 10, when he visited the U.S. Capitol, a reporter called out, “Are you going to ask Congress to ban Muslims from entering the country?” Trump heard the question, replied, “Thank you, everybody,” and walked away. The next day, in his interview with 60 Minutes, he belittled reports of racial slurs from his supporters, calling them “a very small amount.” When a Times staffer asked him about a conference of Trump sympathizers who had “pledged their allegiance to Nazism,” Trump expressed surprise that reporters were still pestering him about such things. “Boy, you are really into this stuff,” he said. He uttered four words of intransitive boilerplate—“I disavow and condemn”—and moved on.

But when people who feel threatened by Trump challenge his friends, he rushes to defend his friends. On Nov. 18, Vice President–elect Mike Pence went to see Hamilton. After the show, the cast delivered a short speech to Pence on behalf of “the diverse America who are alarmed and anxious that your new administration will not protect us.” The message concluded: “We truly hope that this show has inspired you to uphold our American values and to work on behalf of all of us.” Trump responded by attacking the cast on Twitter, charging that they had “harassed” Pence and violated the theater as “a safe and special place.”[...]

12. He’s easily manipulated. Having a fragile, approval-craving narcissist as president isn’t the end of the world. It just means that to get him to do the right thing, you have to pet him. In Trump’s post-election exchanges, we have several useful models. The first is Obama, who gave Trump a tongue bath in their 90-minute meeting on Nov. 10 and may have saved his signature legislative achievement in the process. Three days after that meeting, Trump told the Journal he was reconsidering his pledge to abolish Obama’s health insurance program: “Either Obamacare will be amended, or repealed and replaced.”

The second model is Times columnist Tom Friedman. In the group session at Times headquarters on Nov. 22, Friedman worked Trump like a horndog in a bar, trying to get him into bed on climate change. “You own some of the most beautiful links golf courses in the world,” Friedman told Trump. “I’d hate to see Royal Aberdeen underwater,” the columnist added. When Trump ragged on windmills, Friedman whispered sweet nothings: “General Electric has a big wind turbine factory in South Carolina.” Trump, eager for approval, told the Times staffers about his “many environmental awards” and bragged, “I’m actually an environmentalist.” By the end of the session, Friedman had Trump eating out of his hand.

The third model is a story Trump told about his threat to narrow the First Amendment. During the primaries, Trump had pledged to “open up our libel laws so when [journalists] write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money.” But in his meeting with the Times, Trump said someone had later warned him, “It’s a great idea, softening up those laws, but you may get sued a lot more.” “You’re right, I never thought about that,” Trump recalled telling this person. And that reflection led Trump to assure the Times that on the question of libel laws, “You’re going to be fine.”

The fourth model is Jim Mattis, the retired general who met with Trump on Nov. 19 to be considered for secretary of defense. Trump asked Mattis about waterboarding, which Trump supported. “I’ve never found it to be useful,” said Mattis, according to Trump’s account of their conversation. “Give me a pack of cigarettes and a couple of beers, and I do better with that than I do with torture,” the general told him. Trump told the Times that he was “very impressed by that answer,” especially because it came from “the toughest guy.” Waterboarding, Trump concluded, was “not going to make the kind of a difference that maybe a lot of people think.”

That’s how you move Trump. You don’t talk about ethics. You play the toughness card. You appeal to the art of the deal. You make him feel smart, powerful, and loved. You don’t forget how unmoored and volatile he is, but you set aside your fear and your anger. You thank God that you’re dealing with a narcissist, not a cold-blooded killer. And until you can get him safely out of the White House, you work with what you have. People in other countries have dealt with presidents like Trump for a long time. Can we handle it? Yes, we can.

Diaspora pedophiles increasingly use Israel as ‘a haven,’ activists charge

Times of Israel

The text message came in Hebrew and English. “A warning to the citizens of Israel: JCW [Jewish Community Watch, an organization that monitors child sex abuse] has received credible information that [redacted] has plans to return to Israel in early November, with intentions of moving to the Ramot neighborhood of Jerusalem. The authorities in Israel have been notified, as well as local community leaders.”

The text message, sent to thousands of people on the JCW update list, raced through Jerusalem’s Ramot neighborhood. According to New York’s sex offender registry, the person in question is a Level 2 sex offender, at moderate risk of reoffending. The message continued with more background and allegations against the immigrant offender.

“In 2007, [redacted] had escaped to Israel through Canada in an effort to evade arrest from the police in New York. He was formally charged in absentia with 8 counts of deviate sexual intercourse with two 13-year-old minors on the same day his aliyah status was approved. Months later [redacted] was extradited back to NY where he was convicted in 2009 and served time until his release in February 2012. Currently [redacted] still holds Israeli citizenship under the alias [redacted].”

According to Shana Aronson, the Israel operations coordinator for Jewish Community Watch, the text message is a public service.

“People have a right, after they serve their time, to live their life,” said Aronson. “But the community has a right to know who they are. They shouldn’t be vilified any more than is necessary to protect the community. But nothing is more devastating than a repeat offender. It’s infuriating. It could have been prevented.”

One of the country’s founding pieces of legislation, the Law of Return allows any Diaspora Jew to receive citizenship in Israel. But child rights activists contend there is a dark loophole to the law which allows Jewish pedophiles to effectively flee court-mandated supervision in their home countries and move to Israel with a clean slate.

In a grassroots effort to deal with the problem, activists and concerned parents are starting to raise awareness on social media, issuing “warnings” via text message, Twitter, and Facebook to parents in neighborhoods where convicted or alleged pedophiles are moving. But their unregulated efforts are also drawing a backlash.

On November 24, the Jerusalem District Court held the first procedural hearing in a case from convicted pedophile Yona Weinberg, who is suing child rights activist Yakov Horowitz. Horowitz tweeted out a warning to parents in Jerusalem’s Har Nof neighborhood after Weinberg moved there.

In his suit, Weinberg, from Brooklyn, New York, accuses Horowitz of slander and libel for encouraging parents to treat him like “a terrorist with a machete.”

However, child abuse activists say that especially in the case of Israel, these social media warnings are warranted.

“There’s a danger that Israel is becoming a safe haven for pedophiles and alleged perpetrators,” said Manny Waks, a survivor of child abuse and the founder of Kol V’Oz, an advocacy group addressing child sex abuse in the global Jewish community. “Of course, any criminal can flee to another country, but it’s about getting the visa to remain there. Because Israel welcomes all Jews, they’re protected from that perspective,” he said

A registered sex offender under supervision in their home country will not have that supervision transferred to Israel when they receive citizenship. A convicted criminal can make aliyah if the Interior Ministry approves their application, especially if the person has already served their sentence or the crime was a misdemeanor.

Jewish Community Watch says that 32 pedophiles in their database have moved from countries around the world to Israel in the past decade. By contrast, during the same period it has tracked just 12 Jewish pedophiles that have moved abroad from their homelands to countries other than Israel.

When sex offenders move to other countries, there is no international procedure in place for how to monitor or supervise them in their new country. However, international visa requirements make it difficult for nonresidents to live long-term in a new country. Israel is a particularly attractive destination for sex offenders, because the Law of Return allows all Jews to receive citizenship in a very short period of time.

In another, related issue, alleged pedophiles — suspected but not formally charged with any crime — sometimes flee to Israel before authorities get involved. In close-knit Jewish communities, especially among the ultra-Orthodox, a distrust of authorities and tradition of keeping problems “within the community” means that allegations of abuse can arise well before victims notify law enforcement. This gives the purported pedophiles ample time to flee to Israel and apply for aliyah.

If there are no ongoing legal cases against them at the time of their application, they are approved for citizenship in Israel. Even if the authorities in their home countries do move to press charges after the aliyah process is completed, Israel is often reluctant to extradite citizens, meaning the perpetrator can continue to live in Israel and move about freely.[...]

Approval for a convicted criminal to make aliyah, i.e, immigrate to Israel, would depend on “the nature of the crime, when it was committed, and what has transpired in the interim,” said Jewish Agency spokesperson Avi Mayer.

In 1954, the Law of Return was adapted to exclude “a person with a criminal past, likely to endanger public welfare.” Mayer said that only the Interior Ministry determines what kind of criminals are considered to “endanger public welfare.”

Interior Ministry spokeswoman Sabine Hadad said any aliyah application coming from someone who was convicted of a crime goes to a special committee within the Interior Ministry, though the final say for rejecting an applicant rests with the interior minister. Hadad refused to comment on what kind of crimes render a person inadmissible for aliyah.

Even if the Interior Ministry is aware that a convicted sex criminal is under supervision in their home country, only an order from the Israeli courts can place a convicted criminal under supervision in Israel, explained Prison Services spokesman Assaf Librati. Israeli courts are unlikely to hear a case if the crime happened in another country, he added. The Prison Services monitors pedophiles convicted in Israel.

But Librati added that sex criminals are unlike other types of criminals, a position echoed by many activists. “If someone robbed a bank and served their time, they don’t need continued supervision,” he said. “But if someone abused children, they will need ongoing supervision, even if they already served their time.”

Librati called the Prison Services’s inability to monitor these pedophiles a “hole” in the law that allows convicted sex offenders to roam freely in Israel.

Just 19 countries around the world have a national sex offender registry, according to the US Department of Justice (PDF). Of those, the US is one of the few countries that makes their registry public, a situation which has its supporters and detractors. The US national registry is easily searchable on the National Sex Offender Public Website or the new mobile app. Israel has a private national sex offender registry, which only Israeli police and prison services can access.

In Israel, people who want to work in schools and with children are often asked to provide a teudat yosher from the police, which states that the person is a citizen of good standing who does not pose a risk to children’s welfare.

But because the list only relates convictions in Israel, someone who was convicted of sex crimes in another country could obtain this document in Israel, clearing them to work with children.

Jewish Community Watch is controversial in the child rights field because it publishes an online “Wall of Shame” with photos and information about accused child molesters, sometimes even before authorities convict or even arrest the alleged perpetrators. This raises concerns about vigilante justice and false accusations, though Aronson insists the organization’s internal vetting process before putting someone on the Wall of Shame is rigorous. Other organizations are more cautious, only naming perpetrators who have been indicted or convicted.

Aronson said that while the Israel branch of Jewish Community Watch does not take part in the Wall of Shame, the organization considers it an important tool when law enforcement does not adequately address abuse. It sends out updates via text message about once a month of Jewish pedophiles in its database who are getting out of prison or moving to a new community, either within the same country or abroad.[...]

Horowitz said he will be at the trial, which has already set him back more than $5,000. “Not only is there no sex offender registry, you can get sued and have to hire a lawyer and go to court just to warn parents,” he said. “No way that I’m allowing a sex offender to silence people who warn parents about sex offenders.”

“My client isn’t denying that he was convicted in New York years ago,” said Weinberg’s lawyer, Eytan Lehman.

Lehman noted that it is legal to publish information about the conviction. “[Horowitz] claims that Mr. Weinberg fled from the States, running from a federal investigation, and this is a complete lie, and when you write lies you will be sued for libel,” he said. Lehman said that there is no open police investigation into his client.[...]

‘I will give you everything.’ Here are 282 of Donald Trump’s campaign promises.

Washington Post   In Donald Trump’s final days on the campaign trail, he promised his supporters that “every dream you ever dreamed for your country” will come true if he becomes president — one of dozens of sweeping promises he made and is now expected to fulfill.[...]

1. Create at least 25 million jobs and “be the greatest jobs president that God ever created.”

2. Bring back manufacturing jobs from China, Mexico, Japan and elsewhere. States that can expect a rush of jobs include Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Michigan, Ohio, Florida, New Hampshire, Iowa, Nevada, New York and Virginia.

8. Bring back the steel industry to Pennsylvania and use American-made steel in all federal infrastructure projects.

9. Make the auto industry in Michigan “bigger and better and stronger than ever before.” Trump plans to return to the state each time a new factory or auto plant opens.

10. Bring the coal industry back to life in the Appalachian Mountain region.

11. Require employers to recruit “from the unemployment office — not the immigration office.”

12. Leave the federal minimum wage at $7.25 per hour, which is already too high.

13. Raise the federal minimum wage to $10 per hour, as $7.25 is too low and “the minimum wage has to go up.”

14. Allow states to set their own minimum wage.

15. “Under a Trump presidency, the American worker will finally have a president who will protect them and fight for them.”

16. “I’m going to be so presidential, you’re going to be so bored.” He might also quit tweeting.

17. “I refuse to be politically correct.”

25. “I don’t settle cases. I don’t do it.” (This month Trump settled a fraud lawsuit against Trump University for $25 million.)

27. Release his tax returns as soon as an Internal Revenue Service audit is complete.

31. “We are going to have the biggest tax cuts since Ronald Reagan.”

36. Impose new taxes on imports into the country from companies that used to be based in the United States. Trump’s most frequently cited number is 35 percent.

37. Impose a 45 percent tariff on Chinese products imported into the United States.

38. “We will double our growth and have the strongest economy anywhere in the world.” Grow the nation’s economy by at least 4 percent per year, although Trump has also suggested he will boost growth to at least 6 percent per year — if not much higher.

39. Eliminate the $19 trillion national debt within eight years by “vigorously eliminating waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government, ending redundant government programs and growing the economy to increase tax revenues.”

40. Never default on this debt, as the United States can “print the money” or renegotiate the amount owed with creditors, as the self-described “king of debt” has done with his private businesses.

43. Immediately institute a hiring freeze on all federal employees to reduce the workforce through attrition. There would be exceptions for those in the military, public safety and public health.

52. “Completely repeal” the Affordable Care Act and replace it with something “terrific” that is “so much better, so much better, so much better.” Americans will have “great health care at a fraction of the cost.” Trump plans to call Congress into a special session to do this, which will likely be unnecessary.

62. Bring down drug prices by importing cheaper medications from overseas and allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices.

63. Require price transparency from health-care providers so patients can shop for the best prices.

64. “You will be able to choose your own doctor again.”

65. Fully fund the construction of an “impenetrable physical wall” along the southern border with Mexico. The wall will be one foot taller than the Great Wall of China and “artistically beautiful,” constructed of hardened concrete, rebar and steel. The wall might cover only about 1,000 miles of the nearly 2,000-mile border because of natural barriers, and Trump is open to using fencing in some places.

66. Make Mexico pay for the wall, “100 percent.” If Mexico refuses, then the United States will impound remittance payments taken from the wages of undocumented immigrants, cut foreign aid, institute tariffs, cancel visas for Mexican business leaders and diplomats, and increase fees for visas, border-crossing cards and port use.

67. “Charge Mexico $100,000 for every illegal that crosses that border because it’s trouble.”

73. Cancel federal funding to “sanctuary cities” that choose to not prosecute undocumented immigrants for being in the country illegally.

74. Create a Deportation Task Force.

75. Immediately deport undocumented immigrants who have committed a crime, are a member of a gang or pose a security threat. Trump estimates this is 2 million to 3 million people, although experts say the number is much lower.

76. Deport the millions of undocumented immigrants who are in the United States on an expired visa.

77. Deport undocumented immigrants who are benefiting from government assistance programs such as food stamps or housing assistance.

78. Issue detainers for undocumented immigrants who are arrested for any crime and immediately begin removal proceedings.

79. Do not grant amnesty to immigrants who are in the country illegally. “Anyone who has entered the United States illegally is subject to deportation,” and those wanting legal status will have to return to their home country and apply for reentry.

80. Restore the Secure Communities deportation program, which was ended by the Obama administration in 2014. The program was a partnership among federal, state and local law enforcement agencies that worked together to identify and deport undocumented immigrants.

81. “Expand and revitalize” use of Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which allows the Department of Homeland Security to deputize state and local law enforcement officers to perform the functions of federal immigration agents.

85. Allow “tremendous numbers” of legal immigrants based on a “merit system,” selecting immigrants who will help grow the country’s economy.

86. Reduce the number of legal immigrants because it is “simply too large to perform adequate screening,” and these immigrants could be taking jobs away from American workers.

87. Expand the number of H-1B visas for highly skilled workers so that more of the “talented people” who graduate from Ivy League institutions can stay in the United States and work in Silicon Valley.

88. Get rid of the H-1B visa program because it’s “very, very bad” for American workers.

98. Be unpredictable and keep all military strategy a secret. “No one is going to touch us, because I’m so unpredictable.”

105. Grow the Army from its current size of 470,000 active-duty soldiers to 540,000.

106. Modernize and grow the Navy fleet to 350 surface ships and submarines. The Navy currently has 272 deployable battle-force ships.

107. Grow the Air Force to 1,200 fighter aircraft.

108. Grow the Marine Corps to 36 battalions, increasing the active-duty force from its current target of 182,000 to 200,000.

111. Leave troops in Afghanistan because it’s such “a mess.”

112. Increase the U.S. military presence in the East and South China Seas.

116. “I will not hesitate to deploy military force when there is no alternative. But if America fights, it must fight to win.”

132. “Ensure our veterans get the care they need wherever and whenever they need it. No more long drives. No more waiting backlogs. No more excessive red tape.”

134. Force other NATO countries to pay for more of their defense, and only come to the aid of other countries if those nations have “fulfilled their obligations to us.” In particular, Trump expects Germany, Japan, South Korea and Saudi Arabia to pay more for the security the United States provides.

136. Get along with Russian President Vladimir Putin. “I hope that we get along great with Putin because it would be great to have Russia with a good relationship.” Trump would also look into lifting the sanctions imposed on Russia after its annexation of Crimea.

137. Communicate with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un about his nuclear program, which would mark a major shift in U.S. policy toward the isolated nation. “I would speak to him, I would have no problem speaking to him.”

138. Stay out of the Syrian civil war. Although Trump considers Syrian President Bashar al-Assad “bad,” he has said the United States has higher priorities. Around the world, Trump has said, he prefers stability over regime changes.

142. Be a “true friend to Israel.” Trump says the United States will “be working with Israel very closely, very, very closely.”

146. Tear up the Iran deal and then “totally” renegotiate the whole thing.

149. “Iran cannot be allowed to have a nuclear weapon and, under a Trump administration, will never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon.”

150. “We can’t continue to allow China to rape our country, and that’s what they’re doing.”

155. Immediately ask the generals to present a plan within 30 days to defeat and destroy the Islamic State.

156. Frequently use the term “radical Islamic terrorism.”

157. Call an international conference focused on how to halt the spread of the “hateful ideology of Radical Islam. ”

158. Allow Russia to deal with the Islamic State in Syria and/or work with Putin to wipe out shared enemies.

159. Work with allies to cut off funding to the Islamic State, expand intelligence sharing and use cyberwarfare to disrupt and disable their propaganda and recruiting. Work closely with NATO and “our Arab allies and friends in the Middle East.” Partner with Israel, King Abdullah II of Jordan, and Egyptian President Abdel Fatah al-Sissi and “all others who recognize this ideology of death that must be extinguished.”

160. “Bomb the s--- out of ISIS” and “knock them out.” Also bomb oil fields controlled by the Islamic State, then seize the oil and give the profits to military veterans who were wounded while fighting.

161. Target and kill the relatives of suspected terrorists, a violation of international law.

162. Shut down parts of the Internet so that Islamic State terrorists cannot use it to recruit American children.

163. Bring back waterboarding, which is widely considered torture, and use interrogation techniques that are “a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding.” Even if such tactics don’t work, Trump says, suspected terrorists “deserve it anyway, for what they’re doing.” (Trump suggested after the election, however, that he was reconsidering his position because of a conversation with a general who opposed the tactic.)

165. Temporarily ban most foreign Muslims from entering the United States “until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.” Trump would allow exceptions for dignitaries, business people, athletes and others who have “proven” themselves. Although Trump’s aides, surrogates and running mate insist he no longer wants this so-called Muslim ban, Trump himself has yet to fully disavow the idea and it is still posted on his campaign website.

166. Temporarily suspend “immigration from some of the most dangerous and volatile regions of the world that have a history of exporting terrorism.” Order the Department of State, Homeland Security and the Department of Justice to develop a list of regions and countries to include. The list will likely include Syria and Libya.

167. Create an ideological screening test for all immigration applicants with the goal of keeping “radical Islamic terrorists the hell out of our country.” For example, immigrants from Iraq and Afghanistan would be asked for their views on honor killings and sharia law, along with their opinions of women, gays and minorities.

168. Heavily surveil mosques in the United States. Trump has said he would “strongly consider” closing some mosques.

169. Encourage Muslim communities to “cooperate with law enforcement and turn in the people who they know are bad — and they do know where they are.”

174. Bar Syrian refugees from entering the country and kick out any who are already living here, as they might be “the ultimate Trojan horse.”

175. Create a database of Syrian refugees. Trump has also seemed open to the idea of creating a database of Muslims in the country, although his aides say that is not true.

176. Set up safe zones in Syria and then force wealthy Persian Gulf nations such as Saudi Arabia to pick up the bill. “They’re gonna put up all the money. We’re not gonna put up money. We’re gonna lead it and we’ll do a great a job. But we’re gonna get the Gulf states to put up the money.”

178. Gut, if not eliminate, the Environmental Protection Agency, which Trump has called a “disgrace.”

181. Eliminate the Clean Water Rule that defines the ”waters of the United States” and gives added protection to tributaries that impact the health of downstream waters.

182. Scrap the Clean Power Plan, which reduces the amount of carbon pollution from power plants. Trump says this could save the country $7.2 billion per year.

183. Oppose a carbon tax on fossil fuels use that could be used to reverse damage to the environment caused by the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

184. Revoke restrictions on new drilling technologies and support “safe hydraulic fracturing” to create “millions of jobs.” Lease more federal land for drilling, including “vast areas of our offshore energy resources.”

185. Ease federal regulations on coal mining to revive the industry. Eliminate Obama’s moratorium on new leases for coal mined from federal lands.

186. Treat climate change like the “hoax” that Trump has said it is. (In a recent interview with the New York Times, Trump seemed to soften that position.)

189. Become the world’s dominant leader in energy production. Attain “complete American energy independence” so that the United States is no longer dependent on foreign oil.

194. Ensure the country has “absolutely crystal clear and clean water” and “beautiful, immaculate air.”

195. Spur the spending of $1 trillion in public and private dollars on infrastructure projects over 10 years. Invest in “transportation, clean water, a modern and reliable electricity grid, telecommunications, security infrastructure, and other pressing domestic infrastructure needs” without adding to the national debt.

200. Create “thousands of new jobs in construction, steel manufacturing, and other sectors” to carry out this work. Only “American workers” will be hired for these jobs.

201. Modernize airports and air traffic control systems. Reform the Federal Aviation Administration and Transportation Security Administration to reduce wait times and hassle for travelers.

203. “Drain the swamp” in Washington and “cut our ties with the failed politicians of the past.”

209. “Lock her up.” Instruct the attorney general to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Hillary Clinton’s “situation because there has never been so many lies, so much deception.” Trump had said the investigation would include Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state and the ways in which the Clinton Foundation raised money. (Trump told the New York Times on Tuesday this is now a lesser priority. “I want to move forward, I don’t want to move back. And I don’t want to hurt the Clintons. I really don’t,” he said.)

214. Allow families to redirect their share of education spending to a private, charter, magnet, religious or homeschool. Provide $20 billion in federal funding to establish block grants that states could use to help children in low-income families enroll at private and charter schools.

222. Ensure that jobs are waiting for high school and college graduates.

228. Rebuild and fix inner cities, especially Detroit. “The inner cities are unbelievably dangerous. The education is no good, the safety is horrible, and there are no jobs. And I tell everybody: ‘What the hell do you have to lose?’ I’m going to fix it.”

229. Quickly end inner-city violence, which Trump has repeatedly compared to war zones. “I’ll be able to make sure that when you walk down the street in your inner city, or wherever you are, you’re not gonna be shot. Your child isn’t gonna be shot.”

230. Create “jobs and opportunities for African Americans and Hispanic Americans.”

231. Reduce the number of people receiving welfare.

232. “And at the end of four years, I guarantee you that I will get over 95 percent of the African American vote. I promise you. Because I will produce.”

233. “The crime and violence that today afflicts our nation will soon come to an end. Beginning on January 20, 2017, safety will be restored.” On that day, Trump says, “Americans will finally wake up in a country where the laws of the United States are enforced.”

234. Stop the surge of violent crime and homicides in Chicago within “one week.”

235. “Dismantle every last criminal gang and cartel threatening our cities. . . . They are not going to be here very long, folks. They’re gonna be out of here.”

236. Immediately stop the killing of police officers. “It’s going to stop, okay? It’s going to stop. We’re going to be law and order. It’s going to stop.”

237. Sign an executive order calling for the death penalty for anyone found guilty of killing a police officer.

239. Ensure that firefighters are not shot at when they are responding to a fire.

240. Expand the use of “stop and frisk,” which Trump says worked “incredibly well” in New York.

241. Encourage profiling and targeting “people that maybe look suspicious.”

243. Pick Supreme Court justices who are “really great legal scholars,” opposed to abortion and fans of the Second Amendment. Select a replacement for Justice Antonin Scalia from a list of more than 20 contenders that has already been released.

244. “If I become president, we’re all going to be saying ‘Merry Christmas’ again.”

246. Sign the First Amendment Defense Act if it passes Congress. The legislation, introduced by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), would prevent any federal agency from denying a tax exemption, grant, contract, license or certification to an individual, association or business that discriminates against gays.

248. Defund Planned Parenthood and reallocate its funding to community health centers.

249. Sign into law the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would prohibit abortions after 20 weeks, the point at which antiabortion activists say a fetus can feel pain.

250. Make the Hyde Amendment permanent. Since 1976, Congress has annually passed the Hyde Amendment, banning the use of federal dollars — in particular, Medicaid funds — for abortion, except in the case of rape, incest or a threat to the mother’s life.

251. On the first day in office, get rid of gun-free zones at military bases, recruiting centers and, in some cases, schools. These zones are like “target practice for the sickos and for the mentally ill.”

252. Use “common sense” to fix the mental health system to prevent mass shootings. Expand treatment programs and reform laws to make it easier to take preventive action.

254. Arm more of the “good guys” who can reduce the severity of mass shootings. Get rid of bans on certain types of guns and magazines so that “good, honest people” can own the guns of their choice.

255. Fix the background check system used when purchasing guns to ensure states are properly uploading criminal and health records.

260. “Open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money.”

261. Oppose the killing of journalists. “I hate some of these people, but I would never kill them.”

264. Fix the rigged system.

265. Sue the women who have accused him of sexual misconduct or assault. “All of these liars will be sued after the election is over.”

266. Sue the New York Times for publishing accusations from women who say Trump groped them.

267. Reopen Trump University. (Earlier this month, Trump paid $25 million to settle a fraud case against the now defunct business.)

277. “I will give you everything.”

278. “I pledge to protect and defend all Americans who live inside of our borders. Wherever they come from, wherever they were born, all Americans living here and following our laws will be protected. America will be a tolerant and open society.”

282. “Together we will make American wealthy and prosperous again. We will make America strong again. We will make America safe again. And we will make America great again.”

Why Trump's contempt for facts is dangerous:Fake News Onslaught Targets Pizzeria as Nest of Child-Trafficking

NY Times   Days before the presidential election, James Alefantis, owner of a local pizza restaurant called Comet Ping Pong, noticed an unusual spike in the number of his Instagram followers.

Within hours, menacing messages like “we’re on to you” began appearing in his Instagram feed. In the ensuing days, hundreds of death threats — one read “I will kill you personally” — started arriving via texts, Facebook and Twitter. All of them alleged something that made Mr. Alefantis’s jaw drop: that Comet Ping Pong was the home base of a child abuse ring led by Hillary Clinton and her campaign chief, John D. Podesta.

When Mr. Alefantis discovered that his employees were getting similar abusive messages, he looked online to unravel the accusations. He found dozens of made-up articles about Mrs. Clinton kidnapping, molesting and trafficking children in the restaurant’s back rooms. The articles appeared on Facebook and on websites such as The New Nationalist and The Vigilant Citizen, with one headline blaring: “Pizzagate: How 4Chan Uncovered the Sick World of Washington’s Occult Elite.”

None of it was true. While Mr. Alefantis has some prominent Democratic friends in Washington and was a supporter of Mrs. Clinton, he has never met her, does not sell or abuse children, and is not being investigated by law enforcement for any of these claims. He and his 40 employees had unwittingly become real people caught in the middle of a storm of fake news.

John Podesta Says Russian Spies Hacked His Emails to Sway Election OCT. 11, 2016

“From this insane, fabricated conspiracy theory, we’ve come under constant assault,” said Mr. Alefantis, 42, who was once in a relationship with David Brock, a provocative former right-wing journalist who became an outspoken advocate for Mrs. Clinton.

Mr. Alefantis suspects those relationships may have helped to make him a target. “I’ve done nothing for days but try to clean this up and protect my staff and friends from being terrorized,” he said.

Fake news online has been at the center of a furious debate for the past few weeks over how it may have influenced voters in the presidential election. President Obama warned last week that we are “in an age where there’s so much active misinformation and it’s packaged very well” on social media sites. The criticism has buffeted web companies such as Google and Facebook, whose chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, has promised to work on technology tools to slow the gusher of false digital information.

But Mr. Alefantis’s experience shows it is not just politicians and internet companies that are grappling with the fake news fallout. He, his staff and friends have become a new kind of private citizen bull’s-eye for the purveyors of false articles and their believers.

For more than two weeks, they have struggled to deal with the abusive social media comments and to protect photos of their own children, which were used in the false articles as evidence that the pizza restaurant was running a pedophilia ring. One person even visited Comet Ping Pong to investigate the allegations for himself. [...]

Donald Trump is making a strong case for a recount of his own 2016 election win

Washington Post   Trump, of course, is pointing only to “fraud” that benefited Clinton; Virginia, New Hampshire and California are all states she won, and the baseless idea that illegal immigrants voted by the millions is supposed to have helped Clinton, given the fact that immigrants — and specifically undocumented ones — overwhelmingly favor Democrats.

Trump was doing this to make the case that he didn't actually lose the popular vote, which has become a Democratic rallying cry following Clinton's loss. It's clearly a sore spot for Trump.

But the president-elect is also, unwittingly and amazingly, calling into question the results of an election that he won nearly three weeks ago. The logical extension of his argument is that all results should not be trusted. In effect, Trump is lending credence to the very same recount effort that he criticized as superfluous.

A caveat on all of this: There is absolutely no evidence of Trump's alleged large-scale voter fraud. And even Clinton's campaign, while joining in recount efforts initiated by Green Party nominee Jill Stein, has acknowledged as much. So I am not saying that there is suddenly a real reason to doubt the fact that Trump won the 2016 election.[...]

What I am saying is that, if the system was susceptible to the kind of pro-Clinton fraud that Trump is alleging, who is to say that it wasn't also susceptible to manipulation that might have benefited Trump? Trump's argument is that our electoral system was vulnerable to all kinds of shenanigans that could have changed the results in specific states. Why not shenanigans instigated by Russia, which experts say aided Trump during the campaign with fake-news propaganda? Or something else? There is also no evidence of this, but apparently evidence is not required for our next president to make a charge.

Trump is alleging that these shenanigans (yes, I said it again) accrued to Clinton's benefit, but if our system has so many holes in it, why couldn't those holes have helped Trump in the states that mattered? If illegal immigrants can vote and there was real voter fraud in states such as California, New Hampshire and Virginia, why couldn't these things have happened in circumstances and places that didn't hurt Trump? Why not in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, where Trump won the presidency by a margin of about a point or less? If the system is that shoddy, it's probably shoddy everywhere.

Trump is saying that something happened — on a large scale. He's basing this on dubious Internet sources, but he's raising doubts about results of an election that made him the president-elect. It's hard to argue, from that point, that it's not worth examining just how many real irregularities there are and whether they all just happened to accrue to Clinton's benefit. This is the president-elect and the soon-to-be leader of the free world, after all, and his words are supposed to carry weight.

This is just Trump being Trump, of course. He is the president-elect, yes, but he's also a bona fide conspiracy theorist. (Remember how Ted Cruz's dad might have been involved in JFK's assassination?) We can no longer dismiss his fomenting of these baseless theories as some political ploy; it's who he is. And he's willing to call into question anything that doesn't show him to be the clear winner. Given that he will lose the popular vote by as much as two full points, he's in desperate search of an excuse for this fact.

But in doing so, he's also calling into question his win. He can't have it both ways, and he's letting his pride get the better of him.

A Paranoid Trump Claims, With No Evidence, That ‘Millions of People’ Voted Illegally

If he really believes the nonsense he is spouting about widespread voter fraud - he should welcome an official recount

NY Times

President-elect Donald J. Trump said on Sunday that he had fallen short in the popular vote in the general election only because millions of people had voted illegally, leveling the baseless claim as part of a daylong storm of Twitter posts voicing anger about a three-state recount push.

“In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally,” Mr. Trump wrote Sunday afternoon.

The series of posts came one day after Hillary Clinton’s campaign said it would participate in a recount effort being undertaken in Wisconsin, and potentially in similar pushes in Michigan and Pennsylvania, by Jill Stein, who was the Green Party candidate. Mr. Trump’s statements revived claims he made during the campaign, as polls suggested he was losing to Mrs. Clinton, about a rigged and corrupt system.

The Twitter outburst also came as Mr. Trump is laboring to fill crucial positions in his cabinet, with his advisers enmeshed in a rift over whom he should select as secretary of state. On Sunday morning, Kellyanne Conway, a top adviser, extended a public campaign to undermine one contender, Mitt Romney — a remarkable display by a member of a president-elect’s team. In television appearances, she accused Mr. Romney of having gone “out of his way to hurt” Mr. Trump during the Republican primary contests.

Claims of wide-scale voter fraud have been advanced for years by Republicans, though virtually no evidence of such improprieties has been discovered — especially on the scale of “millions” that Mr. Trump claimed.

Late on Sunday, again without providing evidence, he referred in a Twitter post to “serious voter fraud in Virginia, New Hampshire and California.”

A day earlier, Mr. Trump’s transition team ridiculed the idea that recounts were needed. “This is a scam by the Green Party for an election that has already been conceded,” it said in a statement, “and the results of this election should be respected instead of being challenged and abused.”

That message runs counter to the one Mr. Trump sent on Sunday with his fraud claims — if millions of people voted illegally, presumably officials across the country would want to pursue large-scale ballot recounts and fraud investigations.

But the Twitter posts could energize some of his supporters, who have claimed online that Mrs. Clinton’s two million-vote lead in the popular vote has been faked. Mr. Trump at times promoted other conspiracy theories during the campaign, including claiming that Senator Ted Cruz’s father was somehow tied to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. [...]

Through the day, Mr. Trump appeared fixated on the recount and his electoral performance. In a series of midafternoon Twitter posts, not long before he boarded his flight, Mr. Trump boasted that he could have easily won the “so-called popular vote” if he had campaigned only in “3 or 4” states, presumably populous ones.

“I would have won even more easily and convincingly (but smaller states are forgotten)!” he wrote.[...]

FREE JASMIJN Horrible allegations by her mother that the court did not decide custody in the best interests of the child

Someone sent me a link to this site Free Jasmijn. Assuming what the mother says is true - it is a horrid case of injustice. At the present time I have no independent verification of verify the story and I am willing to post the father's version of events. It does seem to have points in common with the injustice of the Schlesinger Twins in Austria. The site has important information about cases of children clearly being given to the wrong parent and custody arrangements that are not in the best interest of the children. It also offers advice to the children how to survive this situation [see below]

======================================

In April 2014, when my daughter Jasmijn was 10 years old, she was brutally deported from The Netherlands to her father Dave H. in Marin County, California despite expert evidence of abuse, molestation and neglect by him, despite the fact that he admitted to the court that he has a severe drug addiction to heroin and cocaine and despite the fact that he has been diagnosed with Narcissistic and Histrionic personality disorders.

Her father, with whom she has not lived since she was 1 year old, keeps her hostage at an undisclosed location, demanding money. He has terminated all contact since May 9th, 2015, thereby breaking all court orders.

Not only have I been bankrupted trying to fight this in Marin County Superior Court, Judge Wood has threatened me that if I were to pursue a custody trial she would make sure I would lose it, I would never see Jasmijn again and she would seize my mother’s assets in The Netherlands (there are none!). Judge Adams ruled that she allows the father to get away with breaking her own court orders and is not willing to investigate the matter through a 3118 child sexual abuse investigation and drug testing of the father. She is not facilitating contact between my daughter and me and she is not allowing me to know where my daughter lives either.

How come the father has not been detained yet for criminal custodial interference Cal Penal Code 278.5?

How in the world could this have happened? If you really want to know the truth then this site is for you. Instead of arriving at conclusions based on hearsay and wild allegations, allow me to introduce you to all the people involved in this court-ordered child trafficking case and present you with all the evidence so you can make up your own mind. Then confront the folks responsible for this situation.

Or will you choose to stand by and allow Jasmijn to remain a hostage?

The Summary gives you the overall story, while the Sordid History allows you to access the evidence year by year, play by play. You can also watch this CCN Live archived interview:

========================================

While the following is written from the mother's perspective - it applies equally to cases where the kids have been unjustly removed from the father.

======================================================

Message for the Stolen Kids

http://www.freejasmijn.com/?p=2523

Are you a kid and are you made to live with your abusive dad? Are you not allowed to have contact with your mom? Or can you only see her supervised? You probably wonder why on earth this is happening to you.

Message for the Stolen Kids

Your dad might be telling you that your mom is crazy and/or dangerous, or that the Judge said that, and that you need to be protected from her. The Judge has made you live with your dad, so everyone around you thinks your dad must be right. After all, don’t kids always live with their mom?

If you told your mom that your dad said mean things to you, yelled at you, hurt you, touched you were he is not supposed to, locked you up etc. and told you to keep it all a secret and your mom has done everything she could to protect you, then she is a very brave Protective Mother.

The Worst Thing A Woman Can Do In Divorce Proceedings - The Abuse Of Orders of Protection

Huffington Post by Liz Mandarano,  a New York Family and Matrimonial Lawyer and a feminist

Orders of Protection are critical to the safety of many. Some people claim that they are simply pieces of paper that mean nothing. Detractors point to horrible stories where people are abused or murdered despite having an order in place.

I disagree—although we only hear of the tragic endings, orders of protection carry an authority that at least some, if not many, abusers grudgingly respect. I believe these orders have saved countless from horrible mistreatment that would otherwise have occurred.

However, it is also an unfortunate truth that because they are incredibly easy to obtain, orders of protection are misused, often against men. And this false practice clogs the system unnecessarily, preventing true victims from having their cases thoroughly examined and depleting victim-assistance resources.

In matrimonial practice, men are drastically more likely to be the spouse who has an order enforced against them at the beginning of a separation or divorce. When a man has had an order of protection issued against him, many automatically think that he must have done something horribly threatening or dangerous to his partner or family in order to have a judge feel compelled to issue an order.

Orders of protection can be “stay away” or “refrain from” in topic. “Refrain from” orders direct a person to behave in a certain way. For example, a refrain from order may direct a person not to threaten another person.

“Stay away” orders are weightier. They force the accused to leave the marital residence and stay away from his partner, home, workplace, and family lest they face prosecution. Notably, stay away orders can remove a person from his home even if his name is on the lease or deed.

There are between 2 and 3 million temporary restraining orders issued in the United States annually*. Despite their huge impact on a person’s emotional and financial well-being, in order to receive a temporary “stay away” order of protection, one needs only to allege that he or she “feels” threatened by their partner. There does not need to be any history of domestic violence whatsoever. There does not have to be an actual verbal threat of domestic violence either. Likewise, there does not need to be evidence of a major overt act, such as stalking or purchasing a weapon.

The modern extreme example of a ruling gone awry involved David Letterman. In 2005, a New Mexico judge granted a woman’s request for a temporary restraining order against Mr. Letterman, claiming that he wanted to marry her and employ her as a co-host. She also alleged that Mr. Letterman forced her to go bankrupt and talked in “code” to her via his show since 1994, causing her sleep deprivation and mental anguish. Thankfully, another judge ultimately quashed that order. However, the issuing judge stood by his ruling.



These orders are issued ex parte, which means the accused has no notice of the proceeding and does not have the opportunity to defend himself prior to its issuance. The burden of proof is the lowest legal standard available- by a preponderance of the evidence, which basically means that a judge has to believe that there is a 51% chance (“more likely than not”) that the allegations are true.

These orders are granted with barely any accountability as to the facts alleged, although they often include a “stay away” provision from minor children.

A temporary order of protection lasts until you have the opportunity for a full court hearing—which unfortunately does not necessarily get scheduled for up to six weeks. Due to clogged judicial systems, sometimes a full hearing can take months. Nor does the hearing necessarily occur at the first court date- adjournments from both sides trying to gather evidence for and against the order are common.

Notably, there is no right to discovery prior to the hearing. And once a hearing takes place, the burden of proof remains the same low standard.

When a false or exaggerated allegation results in a stay away order, many innocent men are suddenly tossed from their homes without any notice. Additionally, they face a sudden and profound financial stress— they must quickly set up another residence to provide for their needs as well as to prove to a court that they have adequate provisions for future child visitations. Many rapidly find themselves having to pay for two households to avoid being accused of shirking their responsibilities. Furthermore, these men often have lost access to necessary legal and personal papers necessary to function or defend themselves.

It is a well-known fact within the matrimonial legal community that many lawyers and their clients use these orders of protection to gain a strategic advantage over their spouse from which it is difficult to recover. And since no judge wants to be the one who “gets it wrong” leading to a tragic result, these orders are easily obtained.

What does the accuser have to gain in misusing orders of protection? A lot of things, including the following:

Judicial requests for exclusive use and occupancy of a marital residence are not often granted, and can take up to six months for a ruling. Therefore, unless an allegation of threat of immediate harm is claimed, couples are forced to live under the same roof unless they can come to some form of agreement. Orders of protection force the accused to immediately leave the residence.

It sets a precedent for custody. Joint custody is presumed. However, if a permanent order of protection is issued containing a finding of domestic abuse, that finding cannot later be disputed. As a result, in many jurisdictions, there is suddenly a rebuttable presumption that the victim should have legal custody. Also, the longer a parent’s access to a child is limited, the less likely that person will be deemed the primary caregiver. In fact, often the accused spouse’s children are now afraid of their father. Many upstanding citizens are shocked to find themselves automatically subject to supervised visitation with a social worker. This may confuse children, wishing to “please” their mother, and scar them unnecessarily for life.

It serves as a bargaining chip—many men are forced to agree to a permanent order of protection either of the same or more limited scope in return for something else such as lower spousal support or more access to children.

It drains resources. It gives the accuser the upper hand in property litigation and spousal support. The ousted spouse has no access to their financial documents, tax forms, personal property, safe deposits, deeds, etc. Although he can always request from his wife’s attorney or the court that these items be made available, the process often takes time, and requests for compliance are often ignored.

It emotionally puts men on the defense. They have no access to their belongings and family. There is the mad dash to find a new place, new clothes, furniture, etc. He is now known as the “bad guy.” And, if he acts too aggressively to refute the allegations, it may make him suddenly seem more menacing. The innocent who are accused are therefore thrown into overwhelming turmoil from which it is difficult to recover.

It creates a windfall for the attorneys. Once a stay away order is issued, the parties cannot communicate with each other. All communications must therefore be carried out via the parties’ lawyers. As a result, there is a strong incentive for the less ethically minded lawyer to protract a legal battle by encouraging this tactic. [...]