Wednesday, November 23, 2016

Trump shifts on at least 3 prominent issues: Climate, torture and prosecution of Clinton

People voted for Trump for what he promised. But now that he is significantly backtracking on those promises they are not bothered by the deception - because "at least he said what I wanted to hear and his heart is clearly in the right place. Such a good man - not like that wicked liar Clinton". 

This similar to the explanation that a woman - whose husband cheats on her and beats her regularly - will use to explain why she hasn't left him. "He always promises that he will be better and never beat me again. And then after he beats me he apologizes sincerely for not keeping his promises and he is so nice to me after he beats me. He is such a good man"

LA Times  Donald Trump tweaked the script of his transition again Tuesday, appearing to shift his stance on at least three major issues in the course of an afternoon but defending his right to continue involvement in his worldwide businesses despite the potential for conflicts of interest.

What seemed to be Trump’s ironclad belief that America must withdraw from the international climate change accord reached last year suddenly wasn’t so ironclad. He demurred when pressed on whether he would pursue criminal charges against Hillary Clinton — a signature promise of his campaign. And he backed off on his commitment to torturing enemies of state, saying a single conversation with a retired Marine general changed his mind.

The day marked yet another in which Trump’s agenda bounced around like a pinball. Much of the repositioning played out during a wide-ranging interview with the New York Times — a meeting that Trump had angrily said in the morning that he would cancel over what turned out to be a misunderstanding over the ground rules. By afternoon, Trump was on a full-fledged charm offensive in the mothership of the news organization he had just hours earlier derisively labeled “failing.”

Whether Trump’s remarks reflected a genuine pivot in his thinking or just the president-elect playing to the room he was in will become clearer when he starts governing. Trump made sure to leave himself wiggle room, as he often does.

Still, some of the shifts were jarring. The president-elect, who had branded climate change a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese and dismissed efforts to fight it as a massive, politically motivated waste of time and money, now said that perhaps action was needed, and that he might follow through with America’s commitments in the international climate agreement that he repeatedly vowed during the campaign to disregard.

“I’m looking at it very closely,” he said. “I have an open mind to it.”

The comments put Trump at odds not just with his own campaign pledge, but also with his transition team. The man charged with readying the Environmental Protection Agency for the Trump administration, Myron Ebell, is a renowned climate contrarian who regularly attacks the consensus of mainstream science that global warming is a crisis that must be addressed immediately. Ebell has crusaded against every major effort the U.S. has embarked on to slow warming. The Trump transition plan, posted online, states the president-elect will “scrap the $5-trillion Obama-Clinton Climate Action Plan.”

Environmentalists were skeptical of Trump’s altered tone. “As long as Trump has a climate change denier like Myron Ebell running his [EPA] transition team, you know this is all a bunch of empty rhetoric,” said May Boeve, executive director of the climate change advocacy group 350.org.

Trump also got blowback from the right, whose activists were irked by his decision not to pursue prosecution of Clinton.

“I don’t want to hurt the Clintons — I really don’t,” Trump said. “She went through a lot and suffered greatly in many different ways.” When he was pushed on whether prosecution is off the table, Trump responded: “It’s just not something that I feel very strongly about.”

The conservative group Judicial Watch, which has committed itself to exposing alleged Clinton law-breaking, warned Trump against “a betrayal of his promise to the American people.”

But Trump said he would use his influence over law enforcement to argue it is time to move past Clinton investigations, though that too would suggest undue sway over agents who are supposed to be independent of politics when deciding which targets to investigate.

He allowed there is even a case to be made that the Clinton Foundation does “good work.”

The remarks came on a day when Trump’s own foundation was once again in the spotlight. It acknowledged in a fresh tax filing Tuesday that it broke rules prohibiting self-dealing, which will likely trigger a fine. The tax document emerged after the Washington Post reported on multiple instances in which Trump used foundation money to cover the cost of legal settlements his businesses entered into.

The Trump Foundation did not disclose on its new tax filing what payments were inappropriate. Foundation attorneys declined to comment and the Trump transition team did not respond to emails.

The continued negative attention on Trump’s financial entanglements, though, did not appear to be motivating him to more quickly step away from his business empire. Trump made a point of noting that while he is working to transfer control of his businesses over to his children, he does not have to.

“The law's totally on my side; the president can't have a conflict of interest,” Trump said.

He elaborated: “In theory, I could run my business perfectly and then run the country perfectly.”

Trump’s indifference to being perceived as using the presidency to enrich himself flouts all White House convention.

He pushed back against concerns that turning over his business empire to his children doesn’t free him from conflicts, as they are also his advisors in government and will be in constant contact. “If it were up to some people, I would never, ever see my daughter Ivanka again,” he scoffed.

In another significant turnabout, he backpedaled from his repeated calls for a return to waterboarding and other discredited torture techniques to fight terrorism. Trump indicated he had reversed his view after a discussion with retired Marine Gen. James Mattis, considered a possible pick for secretary of Defense.[...]

45 comments:

  1. A greedy NY businessman with no core values other than profit. We shouldn't be surprised. The difference between him and a politician is that the politician would claim that he hasn't defaulted on promises even when he as. Trump just changes his mind. Like a woman? Maybe we would have been better off with the other candidate.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Since climate change is the most important issue facing mankind, I'm glad he's got off its back no matter what the reasons or consequences.

    ReplyDelete
  3. President-elect Trump pulled the curtain back on the wizardry of much of the media, pundits, pollsters and political class. He revealed the depth of their ability to miscalculate.

    That truth won't be erased so easily. As far as I'm concerned, all the rest is commentary. So he's backing off climate change policy, etc. As Peter Thiel famously put it, "the media takes Trump literally but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously but not literally”

    ReplyDelete
  4. Please translate your comment into English
    1) We all miscalculate - Even Trump didn't think he was going to win
    2) Nobody is erasing the truth or even trying to - That is not the issue. Trump made a whole string of promises which served to distinguish himself from Clinton - Now it turns out he really didn't mean most of what he said and his ideological position is not that far from hers.

    Of course that doesn't matter to you because as you say his followers didn't believe what he said anyway - they simply wanted him as President - no matter what position he takes.

    Why would anyone take someone seriously - now matter what he says and no matter how much is actions contradict what he says? This is worse than papal infallibility. It acknowledges that he can be lying, making mistakes, - but now matter what he is taken seriously and fully respected. Not sure what religion that is but it sure isn't consistent with the Torah.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I moved to Toronto back in the early 1990's and shortly after there was a municipal election which featured a strong right -wing candidate June Rowlands and a strong left-win candidate Jack Layton. June Rowlands won on a platform promising common sense, an end to political correctness, etc. Shortly after winning she implemented policies that were essentially Jack Layton's. (Google June Rowlands Bare Naked Ladies for further details and no, there's no actual nudity involved)
    So it seems that America has discovered the same thing about Trump. Here's predicting no change to Obamacare, no change to climate change treaties, no change to NAFTA, no moving the American embassy to Yerushalayim and yes to influence peddling, bribery, and vindictive destruction of the administration's enemies, just like we'd have gotten with Hillary.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Since climate change is the most important issue facing mankind and has to be dealt with RIGHT NOW I'm glad Obama got China to sign an agreement allowing them to massively increase their coal-fired carbon output until 2030 (at least).

    ReplyDelete
  7. how about providing some context as well as links to this issue

    ReplyDelete
  8. http://www.carbontracker.org/what-does-the-us-china-climate-change-agreement-mean-in-practice-analytical-insights/

    ReplyDelete
  9. Yah yah. The lefty pundits who got absolutely everything wrong this whole year natter on as if their opinion means anything. Let's see what happens when he gets into office.

    ReplyDelete
  10. why is it terrible if a newspaper analysis comes to the wrong conclusion but if Trump makes an analysis and he is mistaken you have no problem?
    Why is a newspaper required to correct their factual errors but Trump is not required to get the facts straight?
    Why is a newspaper deserving of all sorts of insults for values that differ from yours - but Trump can keep switching his values depending on the way the wind is blowing and it doesn't concern you?

    ReplyDelete
  11. http://www.carbontracker.org/what-does-the-us-china-climate-change-agreement-mean-in-practice-analytical-insights/

    ReplyDelete
  12. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/12/china-and-us-make-carbon-pledge

    ReplyDelete
  13. Not sure which Trump analysis you're referring to. Trump is the one who got things right this election. The press were in their bubbles, reporting on the state of their own navels, and they are still doing that today.

    As I've said before, all politicians take liberties with the truth. It is unfortunate, but part of politics. Journalists, though, are not supposed to be doing that kind of thing, so when they do, they need to correct the errors. [They also should not be slanting the news, or reporting selectively or with a strong bias, but they have been doing nothing but that for all this election, which is why I am disgusted with them, and unimpressed by anything they write about Trump.]

    Values are what I actually care about in politicians, not the niggling details of policy that you [and the antagonistic press] seem to be obsessed with. As I've said to you lo these many times, Trump's core values are what I like about him. He has switched none of those insofar as I can tell. Specific policies might be amended, figured out, tweaked -- it's to be expected, since we live in a representative republic, not a monarchy. Obama ruled by executive fiat -- his phone and his pen -- but that's off the reservation. Presidents need to compromise and accommodate, and that's what I expect Trump to do. [I actually find it amusing that the lefty press is upset that he is softening the positions they claim to hate about him; suddenly, that's a problem. The actual problem is that they will hate him no matter what he does or doesn't do, b/c "racism."]

    ReplyDelete
  14. Please remember, a significant portion of Trump's votes were "Not Hillary" votes, not pro Trump. Those voters really are not overly concerned with these details.

    ReplyDelete
  15. This is actually good news. And it is good because it shows Trump is in touch with reality. All politicians make outrageous promises or claims, especially when they have the luxury of not being in power. When they finally get power, they realise they are impotent. It also shows that he has some good and experienced advisors. Remember, Obama, Bush, Al Gore, etc all made promises. Same with Barak, Netanyahu, Rabin etc. They were not able to deliver everything they promised.

    ReplyDelete
  16. you are totally off - but since we have both stated our differing views countless times don't see any reason to go through another iteration.

    ReplyDelete
  17. If the issues teh candidates campaign on are irrelevant, since they will not keep their campaign promises, then on what basis do we choose a candidate to vote for?

    ReplyDelete
  18. He didn't try to deliver. He's not even president and he's backing out. That's called lying.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Trump followers say they voted primarily because he said what they wanted to hear not what they thought he would do - "they took him seriously but not literally" a.k.a. post-truth

    ReplyDelete
  20. As we can see, Trump is moderating, as I expected. To beat the Progressive Left, he had to match rhetorical fire with fire.

    Part of the problem with the rampant media bias during the election, was the fact that they took anything Trump uttered literally. Here is an example. I wrote the following a few weeks ago and posted on this blog:

    ‘An example of the extreme media bias was on display last week regarding a comment Mr. Trump made concerning ISIS. After Obama pulled the US out of Iraq without leaving behind American troops, Iraq fell into chaos and ISIS arose. A historical parallel could be made with the Versailles Treaty after WW1 that put onerous penalties on Germany. Historians mention that the treaty was one the factors that led to Nazism. Thus, hypothetically, if Secretary of State John Kerry during negotiations over Syria said, “We want to make sure these talks do not end up like the Versailles treaty that created the Nazi Party”, the journalists would ‘understand’ that Kerry was not speaking literally and would applaud such words of wisdom. But when Mr. Trump made the same type of analogy and said that Obama/Clinton founded Isis, the media hounded him like jackals, taking him literally, demanding he take back such an outlandish remark.’

    Any balanced reportage would have taken into consideration the 'politics' of campaigning. The media's attempt to paint Trump as a fascist and racist failed. Why? Because he is neither. His over 40 years in the limelight showed otherwise, and the electorate wisely followed their sachel rather than the media's.

    ReplyDelete
  21. in other words in order to win Trump severely misrepresented his views - Hillary the liar made him lie?! are you serious?

    why don't we talk about how political leaders are pure as the driven snow - but in order to win - they can lie, cheat steal or even kill. Is there any limit on what an honoest politician can do and still be considered an honest politician in your eyes? Or are you saying that all politicians are low lifes but some are lower than others and they have the right to fight the lower lifes anyway they can?

    ReplyDelete
  22. We (meaning, me, and likely some of the other millions who voted) wanted to show that democracy in America can mean upsetting the political applecart. I don't think I'm writing in Sanskrit.

    If that's an Aveirah, I'll need to do Tshuva.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I don't think you are reading the situation correctly. He didn't misrepresent his views; he has no views. A person who has not seriously considered any issue cannot be said to have a view about it. Take the waterboarding issue: On the campaign trail, he said that it works, so he is in favor of it. Yesterday, he revealed that his candidate for Defense told him it does not work, so he is changing his mind. What was his first assessment based on? Nothing at all.

    ReplyDelete
  24. The only flaw in your analogy is that if Kerry were to state that and then be asked to clarify, he would not double down by repeatedly claiming that he meant his words 100% literally, as Trump did.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Trump did not reverse on his opposition to the climate change hoax

    http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/11/23/fake-news-update-media-falsely-spins-trumps-climate-comments-read-full-nyt-transcript/

    ReplyDelete
  26. Not quite. I looked at the tone and direction, not the details, and certainly not the statements made only for effect.

    ReplyDelete
  27. How can he "try to deliver" if he hasn't assumed office yet? Duh.

    It's great the way he makes lefty heads explode.

    ReplyDelete
  28. He tried during the campaign - why is he giving even before getting into office. Not hard to understand even for a rightwinger

    ReplyDelete
  29. no he just said he will think about whether he should.

    ReplyDelete
  30. sometimes tossing a grenade into a miserable situation makes things better and sometimes it makes it worse. There is no general rule that dynamite is the tool of choice for political and social problems.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Wasn't the climate hoax disproved by the discovery of various East Anglia emails which proved fraud in the so called science?

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2011/11/23/climategate-2-0-new-e-mails-rock-the-global-warming-debate/#2e4cf968988d

    ReplyDelete
  32. That is part of the reason he won; instead of kowtowing to the media, he indeed 'doubled down'. Enough Americans caught on to Trump's game, realising that he was gaming the media, exposing their bias and foolishness.

    The flaw in your take is the havamina that the media would have asked Kerry to clarify his words. Impossible scenario.

    ReplyDelete
  33. In which way did Trump 'switch' his values? The values he professed in his book 'The Art of the Deal' some 30 years ago are the same ones he holds today.

    ReplyDelete
  34. The only dynamite Trump has used is to demolish obsolete buildings, only to replace them with iconic, magnificent edifices.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Um, no.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy

    http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions/fight-misinformation/debunking-misinformation-stolen-emails-climategate.html#.WDdB3-Z96Uk

    ReplyDelete
  36. In Egypt, it made things better. For the Jews. And, presumably, for those Egyptians that survived the plagues.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I would trust Forbes over Wikipedia any day. Wikipedia is known to keep a strict leftist regimen which renders their reporting questionable.

    ucsusa is a society formed to advocate global warming nonsense.

    31,000 scientists say that there is no convincing evidence of global warming.

    http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/myths/31000-scientists-say-no-convincing-evidence

    ReplyDelete
  38. you might take a trip to the north pole where things are as cold as they used to be

    ReplyDelete
  39. Why? Do you think that things are hotter in your experience?

    In any case, the whole scam of global warming is ridiculous since China doesn't care about it and anything that America might do would pale in insignificance to the deleterious things that China is doing.

    http://www.newsmax.com/LarryBell/climate-global-warming-ipcc/2016/05/31/id/731497/

    The motive behind the global warming scam

    http://www.global-warming-and-the-climate.com/global-warming-hoax.html

    ReplyDelete
  40. And a much s smaller number of Hillary voters were "not trump".

    ReplyDelete
  41. Do yourself a favor: Just Google "average monthly temperatures" and see for yourself. Then try "polar ice caps." Then try "rising sea levels."

    ReplyDelete
  42. Actually, it is undeniable that temperatures have been rising. This is from NASA: The 10 warmest years in the 134-year record all have occurred since 2000, with the exception of 1998. The year 2015 ranks as the warmest on record.

    ReplyDelete
  43. true. My point was only that many Trump voters are not disappointed that Trump appears to be changing his mind.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Here is an interesting analysis that explains the purpose and origin of "post-truth" politics. It seems american "democracy" is being undermined.

    https://thinkprogress.org/when-everything-is-a-lie-power-is-the-only-truth-1e641751d150#.y0vzdtvxp

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.