This news should come as no surprise that the Donald Trump administration will have as little regard for women as the candidate himself had in the presidential election.
“The ex-wife of President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to be labor secretary, Andrew Puzder, appeared in disguise on ‘The Oprah Winfrey Show’ as a victim of domestic violence, after having accused him multiple times of physically assaulting her in the 1980s,” Politico reports.
“Additionally, a 1988 petition… from the Circuit Court of St. Louis County provides previously unreported details of the alleged abuse: Puzder’s ex-wife, Lisa Fierstein, accused him of having ‘assaulted and battered [her] by striking her violently about the face, chest, back, shoulders, and neck, without provocation or cause,’ and that as a consequence she ‘suffered severe and permanent injuries.’”
At times acting peevish and clearly petulant Donald Trump held a press conference this morning. The event proved that not much personal growth has taken place within Trump since the last time he took questions from journalists.
What made this press conference so interesting, other than it being the first one since the election, was that it occurred just hours after news reports of an embarrassing type surfaced about Trump. Both Trump and President Obama were briefed on Russia’s efforts to help Trump politically with the larger goal of creating instability inside the US and potentially gathering blackmail material. None of the allegations have been verified, but apparently intelligence officials believed the information was credible enough to bring it to them.
In addition some news outlets reported that some of the information was personally embarrassing to Trump such as his reported urging for paid “sex workers” to go to the bathroom on each other. (It should be noted as a reader of history and a life-long politico I am simply appalled at what the American voters have allowed to happen.)
Trump has little grasp on the foundations of democracy as demonstrated by the way be conducted himself and the campaign in 2016. His insults and utter disdain for the Fourth Estate has long been a most troubling aspect about him that has been met with continuous condemnation on this blog.
Today when he rudely insulted a reporter from the highly-regarded BBC and totally rejected in a confrontational style a question from CNN only underscores the prickly and thin-skinned person who has been allowed to sit in the Oval Office. The nation needs to heed the inability for Trump to act with rational thoughts when pressed on matters that deserve a complete and transparent answer.
I do fear that his nasty and uncontained character will one day do our nation severe damage. It is clear that the man can not even handle a simple press conference. Can you even imagine the way he will act when the actual pressure of governing is added to his day?
The day after this post was published there was much doubt as to the reliability of the report contained therein. It made for much dismay with those who were in the intelligence community, politicians, and the media. It would be wrong in my estimation to remove the post as this blog in some ways is akin to a diary. It is a reflection of the events which transpire. Therefore the post remains.
I contend that if Donald Trump did not have money he would still be a virgin. But that personal belief aside comes this nugget in what is now being called “trickle down economics” or the ‘opposite of a golden parachute’. This news about Donald trump is making its way around the nation.
Russian intelligence officers planned to blackmail Donald Trump with knowledge of his alleged “perverted sexual acts,” a new report obtained by Buzzfeed alleges. The unverified report by a person claiming to be a former British intelligence official alleges that Russian officials intended to blackmail Trump with evidence of him allegedly hiring multiple sex workers to perform “golden showers” in front of him. The hotel where the acts allegedly occurred were said to be under Russian surveillance.
President Obama took the stage in Chicago this evening and again demonstrated why he is loved, admired, and deeply respected by so many of my fellow Americans. In his farewell speech he used his soaring intellect to connect us all to the enduring American ideals along with a need for concerned citizens to keep working and moving toward more change.
Over the past eight years I have been reminded time and again what deep reservoirs of patience Obama has demonstrated in the face of some of the most scurrilous political attacks which any contemporary president has had to deal. With grace and poise he has remained above the storm and marshalled on in the pursuit of the national needs.
When so many other politicians have been boisterous and verbally combative President Obama has resorted to reflection and pondering a matter before providing a deep, meaningful and precise response.
When many voters relish the shallow and even blatantly wrong dis-information so to not be required to address national issues in a productive manner it was Obama who never detoured from reason but battled on the high ground of facts.
This evening Obama said “Tonight it’s time for me to say thanks. You made me a better president. You made me a better man.”
Let me say that it was you, Mr. President, who has made this nation a better and stronger place due to your public service. With a full heart and the deepest admiration thank you.
There is not much to smile at in the news these days. But this made my mouth wide with a grin.
Senate Minority Leader Schumer has returned an identical letter that Senate Majority Leader McConnell sent to Harry Reid in 2009 on the Cabinet nomination process, calling on Republicans Monday to comply with the same conditions Republicans demanded when it came to President Obama’s nominees. At the time, McConnell was the minority leader and Democrats controlled the nomination process. The New York Democrat read the original letter aloud on the Senate floor and then posted the returned one on Twitter a day before Donald Trump’s nominees are set to begin flooding Capitol Hill for their Senate confirmation hearings.
There was one remark more than any other from Donald Trump in the 2016 election that made me see red. It was the most heartless and mean comment that came from the mouth of the most flawed candidate ever to seek the presidency. No one who was ever raised in a decent home, or try to live by the word of the Gospels, or have any sense of humanity can condone this trashy behavior.
No one can spin away the fact of what is clear for all to see. Having this in the public consciousness and then to have voters accept such vile behavior is without logic. This is why so many of my fellow Americans correctly feel that we are ashamed and embarrassed by those voters and the result that now impacts the entire world.
Last night Meryl Streep stated for the entire nation what the majority of those who cast a ballot this past November feel. She did speak truth to power.
Like many other Wisconsinites my concern about the words and threatened actions from State Senator Steve Nass regarding academic freedom in college classrooms runs deep. There is a strong understanding among a large segment of the state that colleges have a duty to present ideas and challenge students to think anew.
What has played out over the recent weeks is Nass attacking UW-Madison courses slated to discuss the whiteness of America and the impact it plays on society, and how masculinity is defined and shapes our culture. Not only has he voiced opposition to those courses but also has suggested his position as a member of the legislature means he will use the power of the purse to curtail free speech and academic freedom. Regardless from which political perspective one views this story it can only be concluded that it is not a very (small d) democratic way to proceed.
It is clear that Nass has a certain political view that he wishes to see promoted and underscored within college classrooms. With that in mind one then can ask and ponder what he might have been saying as a legislator in other periods of our history about what must have seemed to some as controversial course work.
For instance, what would Nass have said about the first college class that critically examined the Founders of this nation without the mythology that for so long was cast around this group? Would he have dismissed the idea that talking about white males who often held black slaves while at the same time crafting powerful words for the purpose of making a new country had educational importance? Would Nass have been outraged if this truly politically talented group of men were also studied as flawed individuals?
One might wonder if Nass would have sent out a press release denouncing the use of the word de-peopling when historians researched the result of European migration to North America. The destruction of native Americans by relentless wars and devastating diseases due to migration is without question. At the time those ideas were first introduced to a college classroom there was certainly some who felt it totally inappropriate. (As a descendant from the brother to John Ross, famed Cherokee Chief during the Trail of Tears, I have rather strong opinions about our history with Indian tribes.)
With hindsight it is clear that in each of the above cases our national perspective has adapted to the fuller insight from history and the conveyance of that research through our educational system. What the likes of Nass might have denounced many decades ago about the teaching of the Founders or the settlement of this country is now accepted as fact.
Which leads me to then simply ask why is Nass treating the young men and women who volunteer to take this or that course at a state university, seen not as solid citizens in the pursuit of knowledge, but rather like newbies in the world who require a censoring protector? I strongly suspect that most parents who send their kids to college–along with the money to pay for it–desire that educators help pull those young minds out of the world in which you grew up and give them the reasoning power to gain a fresh view from which to see themselves and the world around them. Suppression of speech, educational research, and the interactions within a university setting is never a good idea.
I have to believe that the majority of the legislature feels the same.