US Politics

That's good.

He was suspiciously less frequent with his posts the last couple of days. I wonder if Bannon took his phone away until he signed the EO.

Robert Harris on Twitter: These comparisons of May with Chamberlain are very unfair on Chamberlain, who rearmed & was one of the few leaders to declare war on Hitler

Thoughts on that petition?
Impressive number of signatories indicating a reaction against Trump, but in terms of content - he doesn't want to meet Prince Charles anyway, he might not really want to meet the Queen if he's likely to get a lecture off her too. Apart from the senior royals and general indication of status/importance, what's the difference between "being able to enter the UK in his capacity as head of the US Government" and "an official State Visit"? Just that we can't prevent him coming, but we don't have to invite him?

I think we should allow him into Heathrow, but not through immigration, he can take all his meetings in T5.

It's a crappily worded petition, but it seems too big not to get debated. A debate will hopefully put the spotlight on May and whether she has a spine.

Let him in but don't tell him we've made disagreeing with Charles treasonable.

Grief stories from banned families stuck in airports with correct visa but 'wrong' passport.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/presidential-executive-order-on-inbound-migration-to-us

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q9UojBAthg

Maybe we've got the motivation behind this order wrong - really wrong.

Maybe Trumps aim is for Iraq, Syria et al to give him a golf course in each country and a plot of land for a hotel and he'll take them off the banned list?

I remain convinced Trump is trying to stir shit up deliberately

I remain convinced Trump is trying to stir shit up deliberately

so when people protest or are alarmed, his supporters can say - look it's really no big deal, quit being so melodramatic. so that in time, any protest or dissent can be dismissed as drama and ignored?

This article clarifies, or muddies, a few issues, depending on your take.

https://sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28/obamas-administration-made-the-muslim-ban-possible-and-the-media-wont-tell-you/

Yeah. The boy who cried 'wolf' and all that. This whole EO plays well to the people who want there to be a ban on Muslims, and the WH is already downplaying the impact by saying how few people were affected out of all the airplane arrivals into the US. This is being set up as a knee jerk overreaction, a rush to conclusions by a hostile media, and it's going to make it easier for Trump/Bannon to delegitimise protest later on.

Maybe. Dunno. I don't think this is just incompetence, though.

The scary thing is, Trump is merely the figurehead.

The sad truth is that millions and millions of Americans knowingly voted for a racist, misogynistic simpleton and there really should be no surprise that he's issuing these orders as it was pretty much what he said he was going to do

I also think it's important for him to play to his neo fascist and angry, ill-informed base, keep their support as strong as possible.

I do not think this is being considered along the incompetent to competent spectrum.

TeamTrump view all muslims as 'the enemy'.

Pragmatic view might be; 'How many travellers would/could be inconvenienced by a prospective 'Travel ban'?,
and,
wait for various parts/offices/departments of State and Federal Government to compile or project figures, and in just a couple of months you might have some evidence for proceeding with or ditching the prospective policy.

TeamTrump just do not care.
Sign the EO on a Friday, let the Department of Homeland Security interpret it how they like,
if it causes a problem with the Judiciary, so what, we've got Bannon on the NSC,
and if at some time in the future it is ruled unconstitutional,
so what, we've got loads more crazy plans we can float on EOs next weekend.

(Oh, and we can start compiling a list of Judges who are not 'with the plan').

Balinese swastika?

FAKE NEWS. The Dammit group is losing readership and should be bought out by someone.

.

The Times trying to make a clarification sound like a climbdown:

Headline: Trump in climbdown over british travellers

""Mr Johnson spoke directly to Mr Kushner, building on a relationship formed in meetings in New York last month. In a statement last night, the Foreign Office said: “Boris Johnson has today held conversations with the US government and . . . we can clarify that the presidential executive order only applies to individuals travelling from one of the seven named countries.”

The reassurance is likely to be seen by some as a climbdown by the White House."

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/trump-in-climbdown-over-british-travellers-jjm5z3sct

So the headline is clearly a lie trying to make May and co look good.

Grauniad See it very differently:

Theresa May feels heat over travel ban as Donald Trump stands firm

"Theresa May is facing a revolt among her own MPs over her reluctance to condemn Donald Trump’s ban on arrivals from predominantly Muslim countries and her desire to push ahead with a state visit by the US president.

Trump has refused to step back from his controversial executive order, despite global outrage"

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/29/theresa-may-feels-heat-over-travel-ban-as-donald-trump-stands-firm

Partly untrue because we know May and Johnson have publicly disagreed with the policy.

Radio 4 meanwhile saying how the ban has been 'modified'. But nothing has actually changed this morning, if you read the Foreign office document. Edit: whitehouse also emphasising this is an 'interim measure'... "President Trump has given some ground"...so while they may not have made actual changes they are trying to make it sound less bad.