Donald Trump: Grievances are coming to a head

8
PRESIDENT TRUMP: Taking a new approach to national leadership.

WELL, whatever your views on ‘PDT’ you must admit that his actions certainly speak louder than his already robust dialogue.

Personally I find this trait enormously refreshing. Over decades of newly elected political leaders literally taking years (if ever) to implement the promises and policies they have been elected on, Trump has already put a number of his most controversial intentions into practice.

The problem is, in an effort to show he means what he says, he is ‘el jefe’ of a political express train that not only ignores stop lights and stations, but is in danger of not even noticing when the tracks run out! As much as I support Trump’s new approach to national leadership, I would like to have seen him taking a rather more cautious route before implementing some of his more risky aspersions.

This doesn’t mean I don’t agree with his policies, ie ‘The Wall’ or barring the residents of certain countries from entering the USA (Saudi Arabia, the biggest terrorist nest of all, glaringly absent from the list!), I most certainly do. It’s the blanket finality of his decisions that worry me.

Things are moving so quickly, that by the time this column goes to press, anything could have happened. Unprecedented rioting all across America.

Trump on the back foot and forced to make concessions to the dissenters. The calling out of the National Guard, civil war, anything. At the time of scribing there is simply no way of knowing. One thing is for sure, many problems and grievances are swiftly coming to a head and at least we no longer have an Islamic sympathiser making the biased decisions we have had to put up with for the previous eight years.

Let’s just hope that the Trump administration doesn’t get so bogged down in legal and constitutional matters that it is unable to function freely. As a final observation, to those who object to the new President’s British visit, I would draw their attention to Mugabe. I didn’t see any petitions or dissenting crowds objecting to visits from this despotic murderer!

8 COMMENTS

  1. Trump angrily cut short a phone call with the Australian PM. It was about refugees the US had agreed to accept from Australia before Trump’s travel ban. In the inevitable Tweet afterwards he called the refugees “illegal”. No, they’re legal – with all the relevant documents. And he Tweeted there were “thousands” of them. A bit of an exaggeration since Obama had agreed to take only up to 1,250 max.

    Trump also described them (mainly refugees from war-torn Syria and Iraq) as “the next Boston bombers”. The Boston bombers were actually the Tsarnaev brothers from the Chechen part of Russia! Oops! He’s so confused. Maybe his pal Putin’s pulled the wool over his eyes. Does he even know mostly Saudis were behind 9/11? Not a single Syrian or Iraqi among them! So why not ban Saudi too? Oh, it’s the world’s biggest oil producer. Silly me.

    As if all this wasn’t enough, Trump has warned the Mexican president US troops could cross the border to deal with what he calls “bad hombres”. That would be an invasion – of Mexico! And his national security spokesman, Mike Flynn, has also warned Iran it is “on notice” – notice of what? War?

    This is an out-of-control president who exaggerated and lied his way into power and who is threatening what little stability the world still has. “Refreshing”, eh? You ain’t seen nuthin’ yet!

  2. Thanks Leapy. finally someone has something good to say about DT. He is fulfilling election promises and enforcing laws already in place. Its a breath of fresh air. Exciting times welive in.
    keep the faith as you say

    saludos
    Annie

  3. Bill Clinton in Speech to Congress 6 years before The Towers & said exactly the same as Trump is doing except he called the immigrants Aliens !!!!! Not one single word against what he said …. Why whats different ???
    Only thing was Clinton like all Politicians Promises. Never carried out one. Video of Speech on U Tube
    But Trump says it & uproar Why ?? & he is doing only what he said & got elected to Do
    I think he will turn out Okay once given chance .. Only been in office 10 days

  4. @ Brian Eagleson : If true & only 1,250 to USA :: Then the way they operate in UK ::: if that is 625 Couples. (If only one Wife) the 10 kids a piece. in 10 years they have swollen to 12,250 etc.etc. If Australia took them more fool them thought they had t

  5. Why do so many people here abbreviate their names or even totally hide them behind fictitious nicknames? If you have a strong opinion about something – like being an admirer of Donald Trump – and you want to make that known why not reveal yourself properly? Why hide your light under a bushel?

    I’ve always given my full name ever since I started writing to newspapers and getting my letters published away back in the 1960s. I believe in standing up and being counted for what you truly believe in and being fully identified with that. After all, every journalist and opinion columnist in this newspaper uses their full name and surname (except Leapy Lee of course) so why do we see so many comments from people who hide themselves behind only first names or even completely made-up pseudonyms?

    Why make up something to do with a fashion statement from the 1950s, or use an acronym instead of a proper surname, or leave the surname out altogether?

    Please stop being so shy. Dive in with me. The water’s fine!

  6. Hi Bri, most of us don’t really care who is writing the comments, your exalted name means nothing to us without a life history and present address attached. So why not use an abbreviation, or anom de plume. Oh I almost forgot you are not renowned for your brevity. I realise you want to be famous and popular but your constant harping about Leapy’s courageous column is bordering on the boring. Better you batter the Times readers with your expert opinion.
    Sincerely, Royston Carruthers Fotheringay Smythe III

  7. Oh dear, Roy Leon. I only asked why some people hide behind aliases, a reasonable question that does not apply to you. So why the need to be so offensive towards me in public?

    As soon as anyone resorts to personal insults their argument is lost. Who would ever happily agree with someone who is insulting them? Maybe someone should explain that to Donald Trump by the way. I don’t generally approve of using insults, but I have been known occasionally to give as good as I get when I reply to them.

    Let’s not forget Leapy Lee is the original cause of all this. Not me. If I’m responding to some of his articles just like you Roy, what’s the difference? Also, if it’s brevity you want, why not take him on instead of me? Just look at the length of his own (often edited) articles every week. He writes waaaay more than I could ever hope to – usually venting his spleen about something or other.

    They’re very like each other – Leapy and Trump. Just look at all the latter’s angry late-night tweets. One ego bigger than the other and both seeking as much publicity as they can get.

LEAVE A COMMENT

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here