No link, but Trump's phone call to the Oz PM is worth a Google.

Dubya will look like a fcuking genius when all's said and done...

Yes - his calm, reasoned presidency is something we can all learn from. A master class, etc..

i have to disagree, its nice to see some one elected keep their word after an election.
but i really dont think you will believe what he is going to do ...

http://boingboing.net/2017/02/09/pennsy ... trump.html

He brings out the best in people lmao.

That is excellent. One of the best tweets I've seen so far.

Have you seen Hillary has trolled him after the court ruling about Muslim ban?

She typed

i wouldnt get to excited as i believe President Trump will win this at a higher level and when he does it will be put in place for the entire duration of his Presidency with increased measures.

there is a thing called action and reaction and the more of this action against the elected President the greater the reaction from the elected President with the full backing from the majority of the electorate ...

I guess we'll have to wait and see. If he want's to go to the supreme court he'll probably need to wait until his new appointee is in place to give a conservative majority and even that doesn't guarantee he'll win - at least one of the judges that just voted against his plan was a Republican appointee. And regardless of their political persuasion, judges can get pretty snippy if they think politicians are telling them what to do.

If he tries to undermine the checks and balances system he could come seriously unstuck as he'd be trying to undermine the constitution and you may have noticed that Americans can be rather enthusiastic about protecting it. He wouldn't want to create a situation where a future president could prune and trim the constitution to suit themselves (like, oh I don't know, removing or heavily modifying the second amendment).

I don't think he'll ultimately win this one, nor does he actually want to. He's playing to his audience (which is after all what he's good at). There's a lot of bluster and noise about delivering something he said he'd do when he was campaigning which satisfies the people who voted for him, in particular he's appealing to far-right (see what I'm trying to do) and less mental people who voted for him (I'm trying to make America safe for you). The eventual position will be heavily modified. A certain amount of it will stick (the higher level of vetting for people coming in most likely) and he may keep in the bank for later that the courts stopped him from doing 'what he really wanted' to justify trying to make changes to the judiciary or something down the line (but see my comment above).

He's running things like an entrepreneur - throwing a lot of stuff at the wall to see what sticks and what doesn't. If something doesn't work he'll drop it (eventually) and move on or come at it from a different angle. While that works in a small agile start-up business it's not necessarily going to work for a country, especially not one the size of the US. And unlike his previous ventures he can't let the country fail/go bankrupt, at least not without doing an interesting impression of a dictator fleeing the country when the folk with the burning pitch forks are at the gates of the presidential palace.

i think you maybe surprised as the majority of the US electorate have remained passive. but i would wait as the US is like a pressure cooker at this time and it wont take much more for it to blow ...

The thing that strikes me is, while I agree absolutely with your assessment, I strongly suspect when he's doing business he has a lot of clever, experienced people around him who spend a lot of time and effort making sure his requests and decisions don't come spectacularly off the tracks. I would suspect a lot of his businesses succeed despite him and much as because of him.

That's not going to happen as President when your every statement and decision is by definition in the public gaze, and immediate evidence suggests the people he's putting in various posts are neither that clever and definitely are't that experienced (or experienced at all in fact) at running a government. One of his ministers managed to commit a technical federal crime on national television, for pete's sake.

The whole point of a government is actually to mitigate the ruler's worst impulses, we'll see how well that works with Trump.

It would probably help if he didn't put everything on Twitter too. I don't know if you've seen the Rogue POTUS staff account but every morning they wonder what mess they have to clean up from him being on Twitter overnight

Yup, there's a mass of 'rogue' twitter accounts for all sorts of stuff now. They're trying to do a lot of stuff on the quiet, but that's just not really possible in the 21st century..

His tweets, by the way, also show he's doing them from an non-government issued Android phone that hasn't had a security update in three years. When Obama came in he was forced to give up his personal mobile and use a specially secured USGov issue Blackberry, which he wasn't allowed to install apps like facebook and twitter on. He hated it, allegedly, but they forced him to do it. Strange then that all the people who threw [LIFTED] about an ex-secretary of state having personal emails on a 3rd party email server, which was investigated by the FBI twice and found not to have a damn thing on it both times, seem perfectly happy with the actual President doing both personal and government business on an unofficial and completely insecure mobile phone and that this has been allowed to continue despite this being pointed out to the secret service by IT security professionals multiple times.

the list that the current US President has used was put in place, in regard to his executive order, was exactly the same list President Obama used when he first became President and which President Obama enacted for 180 days as opposed to the current Presidents 90 days. i believe that time is needed to put in place extreme vetting for those that come from a certain place and wish to visit or live in a certain place, not that it is really needed as most are in place via the department of homeland security and the patriotic act, he is honouring an election pledge. but i would be more then happy if the same was put in place for the UK including extreme vetting.

as of twitter i would believe he is using it to misdirect any information the media are so happy to grab hold of.

and just to note new 'immigration' laws are being proposed which will pass both US houses. you cant seem to see the wood from the trees. this is planned ...

Even if it was passed as legislation in both chambers it would get thrown out by the SCOTUS for violating the separation of church and state restrictions that are listed in the constitution. They would need to ammend the US constitution and that is far from being a trivial exercise.

the patriotic act should have gone the same way but didnt it was passed by both US houses which put in place the Dept of homeland security which then came into being. that was planned.

so there is no get out of jail card anymore that has been used by the federal courts with no appeal to the higher court but placing a bill before both houses at this time because of the unrest will bypass the courts and become law voted on by both US houses. the people rely on the courts to uphold law not bypass elected Govt. this has been done and under the system there is no way back ...

No, the SCOTUS can (and does) rule that legislation that passes both houses violates the constitution and therefore cannot be allowed. It's always been the SCOTUS that is the ultimate arbiter of what is allowed under the constitution, not the Senate nor Congress.