Smiles wrote:after all that ... will Foxccom hire them
Judging by Foxconn's history other than in China and Taiwan, it's unlikely the project will ever happen.
[Foxconn’s chief executive, Terry] Gou said in January, without offering details, that he was considering a display-panel manufacturing plant in the U.S. that would create up to 50,000 jobs. But the details are important, given Gou’s history of making and breaking promises in numerous countries and regions over the years, including in the U.S. A pledge to invest $30 million in a factory in central Pennsylvania in 2013 was also greeted with much ballyhoo, as reported by the Washington Post.
The Brookings Institution heralded that news as a big win for the state and validation of a strategy of creating mini–tech hubs, leveraging university, government and private research and development, as Pennsylvania had done in its capital city, Harrisburg, the proposed site of the plant, and the former steel town Pittsburgh . . .
Four years later, the factory has still not been built, to the disappointment of state officials. They are not alone. In 2014, Foxconn promised a $1 billion investment in Indonesia, which has still not happened, according to the Washington Post. A pledge to invest $5 billion in Vietnam in 2007 has also failed to materialize, nor has the company met its promises for India.
Smiles wrote:Trump has already, many times over, shown that he has neither the intellect nor the empathy to actually make a positive difference to the American economy in general or those Americans who work within it. Trump loves nothing or anyone except Trump ... the only thing he cares about are the hosannas he revels in when he decides it's time once again to ejaculate on The Base, the folks who obliviously excite themselves into orgiastic spasms during in childish rallies.
If you look at the types of people (followers) who attend these comical events you will undoubtedly observe a common similarity: They all apear to be as stupid as shit. I don't mean this in a derogatory manner - just a cold hard fact. Regardless of their style of dress, color of their skin or the slogans they have smeared in lipstick across their hollow foreheads - they' are all just about as stupid as stupid gets. You can see it in their faces. They haven't the foggiest clue what's going on around them let alone complex political subjects. Half of them couldn't tell you what day it is - and the other half don't have enough gas in their cars to make it back home. There's not a person on this planet who would walk around shouting Nazi and/or KKK hate slogans who is not mentally ill and they are standing tall at Trump rally's in full mass. Toss these warped clowns in the mix and there you have it..."A Trump Rally".
Unfortunately that is too simplistic. There are many intelligent people who for whatever reason have fallen for his BS. Many because financially they have been left behind in the last 30 years . Although not all because I know some very successful people who have fallen for the Fake News and Drain the Swamp.
If Trump had a brain he would know rather then Fake News CNN, MSNBC etc are constantly traveling to Trump strongholds to interview people . Many of these people are just ignorant of the facts or just don't care. They have been going backwards for many years and don't like it.
Trump was right about Drain the Swamp , but he has just added to it and eventually many of his supporters will realize nothing has happened.
I have watched as wealth has continued to move upwards , as CEO's quadrupled or more their average salaries and the working man has been left behind. It started under Reagan when he essentially broke the Unions with his firing of Air Traffic Controllers.
When a Democratic Country has 350 million people , you really only have to move 10 million people who vote in the right states to change history.
Amazingly this time it took 70,000 people in 3 states to change the result.
Unfortunately Trump won because Hilary was a terrible candidate and some help from the Russians . Trump would have been buried by Biden.
Trump signs memo directing Pentagon to renew ban on recruiting transgender people
Aug 25, 2017
WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon expects to renew a ban on transgender individuals joining the military and to consider circumstances in which some currently serving transgender troops could remain in uniform, White House officials said Friday.
The new approach will be based on formal guidance the Pentagon is expecting to receive from the White House, following a presidential memorandum that was signed by President Trump sometime before he departed for Camp David for the weekend.
According to a White House official, the memo gives the Secretary of Defense as well as the Secretary of Homeland Security formal authority to return to the long-standing policy and practice on military service on transgender individuals that was in place prior to June of 2016.
The official said that the White House "coordinated with the DOD and General Counsel's office" and were "very familiar with the directives and the final text" of the memo.
While the White House official refused to specify whether or not there might be any scenario in which a transgender service member currently in the military could remain in the service, the White House says the Pentagon will decide a best "implementation plan" to address the situation by a deadline of March 23, 2018.
The guidance appears to be less rigid than the complete ban that Mr. Trump announced last month in a tweet. Mr. Trump had said the federal government "will not accept or allow" transgender individuals to serve "in any capacity" in the military.
The White House official also maintained that this policy decision was based on "national security" considerations, military readiness and effectiveness.
The official said the new guidance is also expected to put a stop to recruitment of transgender individuals and prohibit the use of federal funds to pay for sexual reassignment surgery.
Only one year ago, in June 2016, then-Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced that transgender individuals could serve openly for the first time. Prior to that, most transgender people in the military had been forced to keep their status secret to avoid being discharged. Since Carter's policy change, some troops - possibly a couple hundred - have openly declared their status as transgender individuals.
Carter also had given the military services until July 1 of this year to present plans for allowing transgender individuals to join the military. Shortly before that date, Mattis extended the study period to the end of this year. And shortly after that, Mr. Trump went to Twitter to announce a total ban, without having used the customary interagency policy process.
At the time of Mr. Trump's tweet, the Pentagon was not prepared to change its policy. A flurry of White House meetings ensued, with participation by representatives of the Defense Department, to translate Mr. Trump's announcement into guidance that could be implemented and would stand up to expected legal challenges.
Just last week, Mattis suggested he was open to the possibility of allowing some transgender troops to remain in uniform.
"The policy is going to address whether or not transgenders can serve under what conditions, what medical support they require, how much time would they be perhaps non-deployable, leaving others to pick up their share of everything," he said Aug. 14. "There's a host of issues. And I'm learning more about this than I ever thought I would. And it's obviously very complex, including the privacy issues, which we respect."
Estimates of the number of transgender troops in the service vary widely. A Rand Corp. study said roughly 2,500 transgender personnel may be serving in active duty, and 1,500 in the reserves. It estimated only 30 to 130 active-duty troops out of a force of 1.3 million would seek transition-related health care each year. Costs could be $2.4 million to $8.4 million, it estimated.
Among those who have cheered Mr. Trump's tweet, Elaine Donnelly said the president is halting "a massive social experiment."
"Expensive, lifelong hormone treatments and irreversible surgeries associated with gender dysphoria would negatively affect personal deployability and mission readiness, without resolving underlying psychological problems, including high risks of suicide," said Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness.
Sen. Tammy Duckworth, an Army combat veteran, said the Pentagon should not exclude people based on gender status.
"If you are willing to risk your life for our country and you can do the job, you should be able to serve - no matter your gender identity or sexual orientation," she said Thursday. "Anything else is not just discriminatory, it is disruptive to our military and it is counterproductive to our national security."
Trump Pardons Joe Arpaio, Who Became Face of Crackdown on Illegal Immigration
By Julie Hirschfeld and Maggie Haberman The New York Times
August 25, 2017
WASHINGTON — President Trump on Friday pardoned Joe Arpaio, the former Arizona sheriff whose aggressive efforts to hunt down and detain undocumented immigrants made him a national symbol of the divisive politics of immigration and earned him a criminal contempt conviction.
In a two-paragraph statement, the White House said that Mr. Arpaio gave “years of admirable service to our nation” and called him a “worthy candidate for a presidential pardon.”
Mr. Trump called Mr. Arpaio “an American patriot” in a tweet later Friday. “He kept Arizona safe!” the president said.
In his own tweets, Mr. Arpaio thanked Mr. Trump and called his conviction “a political witch hunt by holdovers in the Obama justice department.” He also pointed his supporters to a website that was accepting donations to help him pay off his legal fees.
Mr. Trump, who made cracking down on illegal immigration a signature campaign issue and had pressed for local officials to do more to assist federal authorities in rounding up undocumented people, had been openly flirting with the idea of pardoning Mr. Arpaio.
“I won’t do it tonight because I don’t want to cause any controversy,” the president said Tuesday night at a campaign-style rally in Phoenix, after asking, “Was Sheriff Joe convicted for doing his job?”
“I’ll make a prediction: I think he’s going to be just fine,” Mr. Trump said.
Mr. Arpaio, 85, served for 24 years as sheriff of Maricopa County — which includes Phoenix — building a national reputation for harsh conditions in his county jail, and for his campaign against undocumented immigrants.
Mr. Arpaio had touted himself as “America’s toughest sheriff,” making inmates wear pink underwear and serving jail food that at least some prisoners called inedible. He was also at the forefront of the so-called birther movement that aimed to investigate President Barack Obama’s birth certificate.
The criminal conviction grew out of a lawsuit filed a decade ago charging that the sheriff’s office regularly violated the rights of Latinos, stopping people based on racial profiling, detaining them based solely on the suspicion that they were in the country illegally and turning them over to the immigration authorities.
A federal district judge hearing the case ordered Mr. Arpaio in 2011 to stop detaining people based solely on suspicion of their immigration status, when there was no evidence that a state law had been broken. But the sheriff insisted that his tactics were legal and that he would continue employing them.
He was convicted last month of criminal contempt of court for defying the order, a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail.
The pardon was swiftly condemned on Twitter by Democrats in Congress as “outrageous and completely unacceptable” and a “disgrace.”
Its timing also raised eyebrows, coming on the eve of Hurricane Harvey, a Category 4 storm, barreling down on coastal Texas. Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, accused Mr. Trump of “using the cover of the storm” to pardon Mr. Arpaio and to issue a formal ban on transgender people from joining the military. (The ban also gives the secretary of defense wide latitude to decide whether currently serving transgender troops should remain in the military.)
“The only reason to do these right now is to use the cover of Hurricane Harvey to avoid scrutiny,” Mr. Schumer said in a series of tweets late Friday. “So sad, so weak.”
Mr. Trump’s supporters hailed the pardon as a sign the president was keeping his word on his campaign pledge to crack down on illegal immigration.
Kelli Ward, a former Arizona state senator who is challenging Senator Jeff Flake in a Republican primary for his seat in 2018, called Mr. Arpaio “a patriot who did the job the Feds refused to do.” Mr. Trump has endorsed Ms. Ward’s candidacy.
Meanwhile, Senator John McCain, also an Arizona Republican, denounced the pardon of Mr. Arpaio.
“No one is above the law,” he said, “and the individuals entrusted with the privilege of being sworn law officers should always seek to be beyond reproach in their commitment to fairly enforcing the laws they swore to uphold.”
The discussion about pardoning Mr. Arpaio had begun weeks ago, while Mr. Trump’s chief strategist, Stephen K. Bannon, was still in the administration, according to two people briefed on the matter.
But the decision to make the announcement during a national news blackout related to the impending hurricane was not accidental. Some in the Trump administration had cautioned against it as too controversial, and had urged waiting, if it were going to be done.
Mr. Bannon had favored the move, as had Mr. Trump’s policy adviser, Stephen Miller, a former adviser to Jeff Sessions, the attorney general and a former senator for whom Mr. Miller served as press secretary.
Mr. Sessions and Mr. Miller share a hard-line view on curtailing immigration levels, and Mr. Arpaio had become a national avatar for Mr. Trump, who had a good relationship with the sheriff during the 2016 presidential campaign. Mr. Trump had once told Mr. Arpaio that he would try to help him if he could down the road.
But that was before Mr. Trump was closing in on Hillary Clinton in the presidential race. Still, he was fond of Mr. Arpaio, and was sold on the pardon as a way of pleasing his political base. Additionally, Mr. Miller fought hard for the pardon, according to a senior administration official.
The kind of man Trump pardons (quite long, but unbelievably intense). This article, in a nutshell, demonstrates the kind of men Trump and Arpaio are, and the kind of danger America is in if it keeps Trump in the White House.
" ... In Phoenix, Trump hinted that he would pardon Arpaio. He said that he wasn’t going to cause controversy by issuing a pardon then and there, but Sheriff Joe “can feel good,” he pledged, and was “going to be just fine.” Trump is likely a fan of Arpaio’s because Arapio is a fan of his—an early supporter who also went all in for birtherism, at one point sending members of a so-called Cold Case Posse to Hawaii to dig up something incriminating about Barack Obama’s birth certificate.
But Trump probably also likes Arpaio because the former sheriff represents in miniature what the President would like to be more maximally—a successful American authoritarian. Earlier this month, in a conversation with Fox News, Trump called Arpaio “an outstanding sheriff” and “a great American patriot.” It’s worth considering what it takes, in Trump’s view, to deserve such tributes. Arpaio, who served as the sheriff of Maricopa County, which encompasses Phoenix, from 1993 until he was voted out of office, in 2016, has a long-standing reputation for flouting civil rights, particularly those of Latinos.
In 2011, an investigation by the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division found that Arpaio’s sheriff’s department engaged in egregious racial profiling in its traffic stops and discrimination in its jailing practices. In Maricopa County, Latino drivers were four to nine times more likely to be stopped than “similarly situated non-Latino drivers,” and about a fifth of traffic stops, most of which involved Latino drivers, violated Fourth Amendment prohibitions against unreasonable seizures. Sheriff’s department officers punished Latino inmates who had difficulty understanding orders in English by locking down their pods, putting them in solitary confinement, and refusing to replace their soiled sheets and clothes. The investigation found that sheriff’s department officers addressed Latino inmates as “wetbacks,” “Mexican bitches,” “fucking Mexicans,” and “stupid Mexicans.”
Arpaio, throughout his tenure, specialized in meting out theatrical punishments both petty and cruel. He required that detainees wear old-fashioned, black-and-white striped uniforms and pink underwear, presumably for the dollop of extra humiliation such costuming offered.
He brought back chain gangs, including for women and juveniles. He housed detainees outdoors, under Army-surplus tents, in Phoenix temperatures that regularly soar well above a hundred degrees. “I put them up next to the dump, the dog pound, the waste-disposal plant,” Arpaio told my colleague William Finnegan, who wrote a Profile of Arpaio, in 2009.
The sheriff called detainees “criminals” when they had not been convicted and once referred to his jail as “a concentration camp.” Finnegan described a federal investigation that found that deputies had used stun guns on prisoners already strapped into a “restraint chair.” The family of one man who died after being forced into the restraint chair was awarded more than six million dollars as the result of a suit filed in federal court. The family of another man killed in the restraint chair got $8.25 million in a pre-trial settlement. (This deal was reached after the discovery of a surveillance video that showed fourteen guards beating, shocking, and suffocating the prisoner, and after the sheriff’s office was accused of discarding evidence, including the crushed larynx of the deceased.)
Like Trump, Arpaio regards reporters, activists, and critics of his policies as personal enemies as well as enemies of the people. The Justice Department investigation found that his department had “engaged in a pattern or practice of retaliating against individuals for exercising their First Amendment right to free speech.” It had “arrested individuals without cause, filed meritless complaints against the political adversaries of Sheriff Arpaio, and initiated unfounded civil lawsuits and investigations against individuals critical of MCSO policies and practices.” As Finnegan wrote, when the Phoenix New Times ran an investigation of Arpaio’s real-estate dealings that included his home address, the paper received a “broad subpoena, demanding, among other things, the Internet records of all visitors to its Web site in the previous two and a half years.” Sheriff’s deputies then “staged late-night raids on the homes of Michael Lacey and James Larkin, executives of Village Voice Media, which owns the New Times. The deputies arrested both men for, they said, violating grand-jury secrecy. (The county attorney declined to prosecute, and it turned out that the subpoenas were issued unlawfully.)” Local activists who applauded when someone made critical remarks about Arpaio at a Board of Supervisors meeting were arrested and charged with disorderly conduct. Arpaio had a private investigator follow the wife of a judge who had ruled against him. And so on.
Plenty of Maricopa County’s residents evidently liked Arpaio’s “colorful” reputation as America’s toughest sheriff. Crime rates in the county decreased during some years of his tenure, though crime rates declined across the country, too, so it would be difficult to ascribe the reduction to Arpaio’s policing practices. And his “toughness” came at considerable cost to the taxpayers, who have had to pay for the tens of millions of dollars it has cost the county to respond to lawsuits against the former sheriff. Meanwhile, reporting by the Associated Press and several Arizona media outlets revealed that Arpaio's department, preoccupied with going after illegal immigration, had failed to properly investigate some four hundred sex crimes over a three-year period in the mid-two-thousands.
Arpaio was scheduled to be sentenced for the contempt-of-court charge on October 5th, and he could have served up to six months in prison. Choosing to pardon him is a gift to the white nationalists. But it also signals a broad-brush contempt for fundamental rights in this country. As Paul Charlton, a former U.S. Attorney in Arizona, told the Washington Post earlier this week, “If you pardon that kind of conduct, if you forgive that behavior, you are acknowledging that racist conduct in law enforcement is worth the kind of mercy that underlies a pardon—and it’s not. And it’s an abuse of the President’s discretion. It’s an injustice, and speaks volumes about the President’s disregard for civil rights if this pardon takes place.”