A little something from the Bible:

"The LORD your God is the God of all gods and Lord of all lords, the great, mighty, and awesome God who doesn’t play favorites and doesn’t take bribes. He enacts justice for orphans and widows, and he loves immigrants, giving them food and clothing. That means you must also love immigrants because you were immigrants in Egypt” (Deuteronomy 10:17-19).

“You must not oppress foreigners. You know what it’s like to be a foreigner, for you yourselves were once foreigners in the land of Egypt” (Exodus 23:9).

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God” (Leviticus 19:33-34 ).

Ombama never made a Muslim travel ban

Trumpies are following Priebus's statement that the seven coutnries singled out in Trump's travel ban were already chosen by Obama for travel ban as the most dangerous, that is not true, Read the real reason in aritcle by poloitofact, oit;s complex reason. Their conclusion:

"Priebus said Trump's executive order that temporarily bans nearly all travel to the United States from seven nations were "identified by the Obama administration as the seven most dangerous countries in the world in regard to harboring terrorists."

Prompted by concerns about terrorism, the Obama administration did put those seven countries -- Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen -- on a list that makes travel into the United States somewhat more difficult.

But that list doesn’t necessarily identify the seven as being the most dangerous.

For a statement is partially accurate but takes things out of context, our rating is Half True."

read the complex reason for the countries and Obanma's ban. see full politifact article:

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2017/feb/07/reince-priebus/were-7-nations-identified-donald-trumps-travel-ban/

Climate Change the 97% Solution

Science has arrived at a powerful consensus about climate change and man's role in it. The statistic most often sighted is that 97% of scientists agree that man is the major element in moving the climate to a warmer state such that ecological disaster will ensue. Trump regards climate change as a hoax and those who understand the situation know what a joke that is. But Trump is catering to a broad base of climate change denial that spans the plectrum of the Republican party,.

The Trump supporters are trying to fight back against the resistance and one trick they have latched upon is to create confusion about the 97%. This tactic is used to its best advantage in an article by Alex Epstein  in Forbes magazine:

What you'll find is that people don't want to define what 97% agree on--because there is nothing remotely in the literature saying 97% agree we should ban most fossil fuel use.It’s likely that 97% of people making the 97% claim have absolutely no idea where that number comes from. If you look at the literature, the specific meaning of the 97% claim is: 97 percent of climate scientists agree that there is a global warming trend and that human beings are the main cause--that is, that we are over 50% responsible. The warming is a whopping 0.8 degrees over the past 150 years, a warming that has tapered off to essentially nothing in the last decade and a half.[1]

The evidence is quite clear about what is agreed upon, Before getting into that, we really should observe that this is a straw man argument. He says climate changers are not being specific because there is no quote that says 97% agree we should ban fossil flue.Most people are just not conversant with the literature.  Most policy makes don't agree with such an immediate ban, not even  the most liberal. Most thinkers will support some kind of phase in so as to allow the market to replace fossils fuel. This radical issue which no one argues for indicates a straw man argumnet that is being used to create a hermeneutic of suspicion and cast a poll over the 97% quote.

The argument that spreads the warming averaged over 150 years is totally bogus because the high end is within the last few decades. In other words if you average it then it spreads out and is only 0.8 but if you look at where the increases come year by year a very significant tend toward major warming develops. We can see from this graph presented by NASSA that this is the case. "Temperature data from four international science institutions. All show rapid warming in the past few decades and that the last decade has been the warmest on record. Data sources: NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, NOAA National Climatic Data Center, Met Office Hadley Centre/Climatic Research Unit and the Japanese Meteorological Agency."[2]




Chart from NASSA article.

Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.[3]

The academies of science from 80 contrives plus many scientific  organizations that study climate agree that man is the crucial factor in climate change and global warming. Naomi Oreskes, Peter Doran, William Anderegg, Bart Verheggen, Ed Maibach, J. Stuart Carlton, and John Cook have authored their own climate comsen sus studies a nd came o the sameconslusiomn which they discuss in a paper they co aiuthoried,Their findkgs:

1) Depending on exactly how you measure the expert consensus, it’s somewhere between 90% and 100% that agree humans are responsible for climate change, with most of our studies finding 97% consensus among publishing climate scientists. 

2) The greater the climate expertise among those surveyed, the higher the consensus on human-caused global warming.[4]

John Cook Backs this up in an article in Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists:

Now, we have a new resource to dispel the myth that there is a lack of scientific consensus on climate change. While a number of past studies have measured the level of scientific consensus on climate change, no one has published a summary of the many consensus estimates—until now. In a paper published in Environmental Research Letters on April 13, I collaborated with the authors of seven of the leading consensus studies to perform a meta-study of meta-studies synthesising the research into scientific consensus on climate change. (A meta-study combines the findings from multiple studies.) Among climate scientists, the estimates of consensus varied from 90 to 100 percent, with a number of studies converging on 97 percent, the very figure derided by Cruz, Santorum, and others opposed to action on global warming. 

A key finding from our meta-study was that scientific agreement was highest among scientists with the most expertise in climate science. This meant that groups with lower climate expertise showed lower agreement on climate change. The group with the lowest level of agreement—at only 47 percent—were economic geologists, who study metals and minerals that can be used for industrial and economic purposes. Conversely, the group with the highest level of agreement—at 97 percent—were climate scientists who were actively publishing climate research.[5]

Notice that all of these opinions are tied to research, They are based upon studies they are the opinions of the researchers, Notice that the higher the level of expertise the srtronger the  agreemrny with the thesis. What is being agreed with is clear, that humans are the catylist in excellerating global warming,









[1] Alex Epstein, "97% of Climate Change Scientists Agree is  100% Wrong," Forbes (Jan 6, 2015)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/#78f02c557187  (accessed 2/7/17)

[2] NASSA, "Scientific Consensus: Earth's  Climate is Warming," Global Climate Change:Vital Signs of The planet. website published by NASSA Holly Shaftler site ediotor, last updated (Jan 31,2017)
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/  (accessed 2/7/17)

[3] Ibid.

[4] John Cook, "The 97% Consensus on Global Warming, " Skeptical Sciece Website (2017)
https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm
(accessed 2/7/17)

[5] John Cook, "Yes there Really  is Scientific Consensus On Climate Change." The Bulletin of The Atomic Scientists (April 13,2016) on line version URL:
http://thebulletin.org/yes-there-really-scientific-consensus-climate-change9332
(accessed 2/7/17)

THE HITLER COMPARISON

I:VE seen several Trumpies trying to argue that Trump is not like Hitler and putting down the comparison. I said he wasn't born in Austria he did not literally burn the Richstag but that doesn't mean he's nothing like Hitler

Karen Heyburn gave one of thebest answers KI;ve seen Here is her's

I understand his process yet disagree with his conclusions. He seems to vacillate between metaphor and factual backstory. I wasn't aware anyone said that DT is Hitler. He behaves in the same manner as Hitler. He advocates for the same policies of value/valueless. He used the same techniques in the campaign. MAGA is a hiccup from "Deutschland Über Alles." His unwillingness to follow laws, rules, or the US Constitution are frighteningly similar. His threats to send in troops through martial law declaration in Chicago is copied. His disgust and hatred at anyone who refuses him is precisely the same. I was born not long after WWII ended. The filmstrip images of that war and its aftermath are burned into this once schoolgirl's brain. To try to explain away the parallels and dismiss the concerns of so many extraordinarily well-educated people is irresponsible as I see it. There is a definite correlation. Perfect? No. But the events leading to a volcanic eruption don't have to be perfectly the same for us to know they are happening, either.

I see two very general similarities. 

I. Like Hitler using the burning of the Richstag so Trump benefited from the illegalities of the FBI director who lied about the emails to swing the vote,

II. Like Trump scapegoating the Jews Trump scapegoats Hispanics and Muslims/

how close does he have to come before we are in trouble?

Whose Coup d'etat is it? Trump's or Bannon's?

Trump's firing of Sally Yates acting attorney general because she would not evoke the travel ban  it triggered memories of what we used to call "the Saturday night massacre." In that time we went through several attorneys general in one night as each in turn refused to support Nixon on Watergate. He had fired Archibald Cox the special Prosecutor while under investigation. Then two Attorney's general in a row resigned in protest, Elliot Richardson,m then William Ruckelshaus.[1]
Those of us who lived in that time find this one reminiscent of that event.[2] The is that moment came toward the end of Nixon's second administration, this one is week two of Administration the first (hopefully the  only). The severity of the event and it's omens doppelganger may only be hints of things to come, 

We are in a more delicate time than most people are willing to admit. It's hard to say it because it almost requires a conspiracy theory to put across, There are clear danger signs, I wont try to unveil a full blown conspiracy but we should at least not be in denial  about the danger signs. I think at least coming clean about what I see in that regard is in order. The first such sign is the bogus allegations of voter fraud that Trump has been making. Kevin Drum Lays out the saga of the bgus claims in Mother Jones. "I've managed to restrain myself from commenting on President Trump's idiotic claim that 3-5 million noncitizens voted in the 2016 election,¹ but I have to admit that I've been entertained by the ever-changing cast of studies that have been trotted out to defend this claim:"

1. Trump himself first cited a 2012 Pew study, and became angry when ABC's David Muir suggested he had misinterpreted it. But he had. The study in question was solely about inefficiencies in voter registration, not fraudulent voting. In fact, at the time the report was released the author specifically said that he had "not seen evidence" of any fraudulent voting.
    
2. With that shot down, attention turned to a 2014 study by Jesse Richman and David Earnest. This one used survey responses to construct an estimate of fraudulent voting, and concluded that a maximum of 500 thousand to 1 million noncitizens might have voted in recent federal elections. This is far below Trump's claim, and anyway it's virtually certain that the study is massively flawed due to its tiny sample size. Once that's accounted for, the most likely conclusion from this study is that zero noncitizens voted.
    
3. With two studies shot down, Trump tweeted today about an old favorite that he heard about again on CNN this morning. This time it's a guy named Greg Phillips, an old tea partier who's now a board member of True the Vote.Remember them from 2012? Phillips is also the author of a smartphone voter-fraud reporting app. I'm not joking about this. Phillips recruited a small army of folks who were worried about the election being rigged, and they all downloaded his app and then sent in reports of fishy-looking voters on Election Day. The app is, um, not very sophisticated.... That's the whole thing. Phillips combined these reports with his archive of "184 million voting records we've collected over time," and then applied an "enormous amount of analytic capability" to produce a final list of 3 million fraudulent votes. He claims that after everything is verified, which will take a few more months, he will release his full list along with the algorithm he used. You betcha. This is so ridiculous it's basically self-debunking.[3]

This may not be just the ravings of a mad man but a carefully orchestrated excuse to throw up roadblocks to minority votes, "Spicer also floated the idea that voter ID laws, which serve to suppress voter participation among minorities, young people, and the elderly, could be a solution to problems the investigation may find." [4] Of course it could be just talk but this fear of coup is being noised about across the political spectrum. On the left film maker and journalist Michael Moore is sounding the alarm  that it is happening now:

The filmmaker and journalist, who was one of the few famous people to publicly predict that Donald Trump would become President, has warned that the US state is being overthrown by Mr Trump and the people he has appointed to govern alongside him.Linking to a New York Times piece about the role of senior advisor Steve Bannon, he posted on Twitter: "If you're still trying to convince yourself that a 21st century coup is not underway, please, please snap out of it".
The article described how Mr Bannon, who until recently ran the far-right news site Breitbart News, had taken a major role in national security policy that usually would only be occupied by senior generals. That move was a major break with precedent and it and Mr Bannon himself have been credited with many of the extreme policy pronouncements coming from the White House in recent days.[5] 

While on the right the Koch brother's network is rife with such fears. 

“As recently as 1960, both the left and the right were united in general support for what was called the American creed. The American creed was the basics of individualism and freedom and opportunity,” Murray explained. “And what we discovered last year was that the proportion of the American electorate on the right that is still devoted to those American creedal principles is way smaller than I thought it was. I’m not talking about how many doctrinaire libertarians there are. I’m talking about the degree to which people buy into what we’ve always considered, ‘This is what America is all about.’”
During a panel discussion later in the afternoon, billionaire industrialist Charles Koch – who has been convening these twice-annual seminars since 2003 – reiterated Murray’s point. “We have a tremendous danger because we can go the authoritarian route,” he said, “or we can move toward a free and open society.”[6] 

If there is a coup goimgn on it;s Steve Bannon's coup. On Saturday night he was given a seat on then National security council and he replaced the joint chiefs on that council, Bannon and written Trump's major speeches and is clearly a motive force behind the administration,[7]

But in terms of real influence, Mr. Bannon looms above almost everyone except the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, in the Trumpian pecking order, according to interviews with two dozen Trump insiders and current and former national security officials. The move involving Mr. Bannon, as well as the boost in status to the White House homeland security adviser, Thomas P. Bossert, and Mr. Trump’s relationships with cabinet appointees like Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, have essentially layered over Mr. Flynn.[8]

This is an ominous move because it politicizes the top intelligence and security jobs. that's the direct implication of makimng such an unprecedented move. Politicizing national security is the first step toward building av poultice state.

The council is no place for political creatures, many have argued. It is the place where the nation’s deepest intelligence secrets, its fluctuating hierarchy of national interests and its jockeying-for-power cabinet members combine as policy differences are hashed out. It is the forum where decisions about war, from Vietnam to Iraq; drone strikes in Pakistan; and conflicts in cyberspace have unfolded over endless hours of meetings.[9]

Trump administration seeks to remove white supremacy from anti-extremism watch list. This according to major news source Reuters:

The Trump administration wants to revamp and rename a U.S. government program designed to counter all violent ideologies so that it focuses solely on Islamist extremism, five people briefed on the matter told Reuters.The program, "Countering Violent Extremism," or CVE, would be changed to "Countering Islamic Extremism" or "Countering Radical Islamic Extremism," the sources said, and would no longer target groups such as white supremacists who have also carried out bombings and shootings in the United States.Such a change would reflect Trump's election campaign rhetoric and criticism of former President Barack Obama for being weak in the fight against Islamic State and for refusing to use the phrase "radical Islam" in describing it. Islamic State has claimed responsibility for attacks on civilians in several countries.[10]

Even if a major coup is in the works it seems clear starting out with moves Nixon didn't use until the end of his eight years. Along the way to making those moves Nixon spied on opponents,created the enemies list, covered up Watergate. It is not too far fetch to ask if has these kind of moves m store for us, It is clear we are dealing with an administrator that no real respect for democracy,

Sources

[1] Derek Hawkins, "Monday Night Massacre? After Firing Yates, NixonsSorded momemt Has been Repurposes for Trump," The Washington Post, (Jan 31,2017) online URL
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/01/31/monday-night-massacre-after-firing-of-yates-nixons-sordid-moment-has-been-repurposed-for-trump/?utm_term=.b7b24847a9d9
(access 2/1/17)

[2]Steven Solis, "For Some, Sally Yates Firing resembles Saturday Night Massacre." USA Today (Jan 31, 2017) online version URL:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/01/31/president-trump-fires-attorney-general-sally-yates-saturday-night-massacre/97273334/  (access 2/1/17)

I thought o that event then found the article.

[3] Kevin Drum. "Here's the Entertaining Saga of Donald Trump's 3-5 Million Illegal Voters." Mother Jones, (Jan 27, 2017) On line version URL:
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/01/heres-entertaining-saga-donald-trumps-3-5-million-illegal-voters  (access 2/1/17)

[4] Pema Levy, "Spicer Suggests Tighter Voting Restrictions as Solution to Nonexistant Voter Fraud," Mother Jones (Jan 25, 2017)
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/01/sean-spicer-voter-fraud-investigation-suppression

(access 2/1/17)

[5] Andre Griffin, "US in middle of coup by Donald Trump, Michael Moore warns." The Independent (February 1,2017) online version URL:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-michael-moore-coup-us-steve-bannon-sally-yates-rule-of-law-a7554556.html (access 2/1/17)

[6] James Hohmann, Daily 202:Fear of Authoritarianism Pervades Koch Network...." Washington Post, (Jan 30, 017). online URL:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2017/01/30/daily-202-fear-of-authoritarianism-pervades-koch-network-seminar-as-billionaire-donors-grapple-with-trump/588e4ed9e9b69b432bc7e09a/?  (access 2/1/17)

[7] Glenn Thrush and Maggie Habermann, "Bannon Is Given Security Role Usually Held for Generals," The New YorkTimes, (Jan 29,2017) Onlimne version URL:
 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/us/stephen-bannon-donald-trump-national-security-council.html  (access 2/1/17)

[8] Ibid

[9] David E. Sanger and Mark Landler, "What Trump's changes mean for National Secuirity Council," The New York Times, (Jan 30, 2017) Online Version URL"
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/us/politics/national-security-council-stephen-bannon.html
(access 2/1/17)

[10] Julia Edwards Ainsley, Dustin Volz and Kristina Cooke | WASHINGTON/SAN FRANCISCO,
"Exclusive: Trump to focus counter-extremism program solely on Islam - sources" REUTERS

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-extremists-program-exclusiv-idUSKBN15G5VO

Advice on Resistimng

Myra Belle Sorrell shared Linda Sarsour's post.

6 hrs · 

Wondering what to do? Me, too. These are some do-able suggestions. A good place to get started

Linda Sarsour

10 hrs · 

People keep asking me what can they do. Folks are fired up. People want to be engaged. We don't have time to ask each other where you were before because this moment calls for EVERYONE. Our communities are in imminent danger - more than they ever have been before.

Not everyone is a full-time activist but everyone can DO SOMETHING, here are some tangible things you can do:

1. Go meet your neighbors. We can't protect one another if we don't know one another. Do you know who your neighbors are? Who lives two houses down or down the hall from you? Knock on a door, say hello, introduce yourself and say if you ever need anything I am around. You can alleviate someone's fear and anxiety by doing this. Its simple and necessary.

2. Do you know who your city council member is? US Senator, Congressmember, State Representatives, Mayor, Governor? If not, get to it. Save their names and office phone numbers on your phones so you can easily get in touch with them to voice concerns or to thank them when they do the right thing. Elected officials work for YOU, make sure you remind them often.

3. Donate to an organization in your local area that is committed to organizing and building power and/or provides services to directly impacted communities. You can also donate to national organizations of your choice that align with your principles and values and are doing critical work at this time. $20 bucks even goes a long way. Support local organizers - check in on them if you know them.

4. SHOW UP. When you hear of a local direct action try your best to make it or at least promote and ask others to attend. Visibility is important. We cannot be silent in the face of injustice and abuse of power.

5. Share important articles and posts that are informative and accurate. Use your social media platform as a way to educate others about what is happening and sharing action items they can do. If an article doesn't sit well with you, it may not be true - try to verify before posting misinformation and creating confusion.

6. Try to stay positive - especially in front of the kids. I am not saying we should lie to them about the reality but explaining what is happening by following up with actions and solutions and/or stories of people resisting makes for better conversation. Love the kids. Encourage and motivate each other!

7. Take care of yourself. News is overwhelming. Remember to drink water and to eat. Try to find a few minutes a day to read a few pages of a book, laugh with some friends, converse with your spouse/partner, kids or nieces and nephews - basically something that brings you a lil bit of joy to remind us of what we are grateful for. We have to sustain our sanity - this is a long journey.

That's all for now folks. Stay engaged. Stay informed. Stay sane.

Trump Farm

Since his first insane ranting as a candidate I have been trying to ascertain is Trump senile?  Insane? or Crazy like a fox?  It could be that he's both or that he i cray and his handlers are like foxes. The point is there is a method, an ulterior purpose behind the ranting. As we peal back the layers of insanity the purpose underlying looks ever more ugly and dangerous. We are starting to see a true fascism emerging, Take the nonsense allegations of voter fraud, that Hillary's popular vote only exceeded his because 3 million illegal voted for her. A massive conspiracy theory that requires an absurd level of paper trial that no one not even Trump's own lawyers think exists,

As reporters and experts immediately pointed out, Trump's belief that 3 million to 5 million people voted illegally in November is at odds with what his own lawyers said in court when they challenged the recount petitions of Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein. "All available evidence suggests that the 2016 general election was not tainted by fraud or mistake," Trump's legal team argued in a brief....[1]

Yet we see the purpose imn these allegations,k as a smokescreen to justify putting up barriers to the black vote, and to other minorities. His own press secretary let the cat out of the bag: "Spicer also floated the idea that voter ID laws, which serve to suppress voter participation among minorities, young people, and the elderly, could be a solution to problems the investigation may find."[2] read more

So is it just delusion of senility, an attempt to save an aged child's brittle ego. Or was it a secret design all along? Whichever,  it is being worked into the grand design  It has no good purpose,. We can also see this fascistic streak emerging in other areas as well.At the same time there is a scandalous array of statments from the Trump Camp and Republican ogress proclamation that we should not listen to the media but only to Trump.The vilifying of the media has been a the theme inTrump's Champaign since day one.His vilification of the media constitutes a threat to freedom of press.

Less than a month before the U.S. presidential election, the Committee to Protect Journalists issued an unprecedented statement denouncing the then-Republican nominee. “[Donald] Trump has insulted and vilified the press and has made his opposition to the media a centerpiece of his campaign,” said the committee, a New York-based organization that promotes press freedom. “A Trump presidency would represent a threat to press freedom in the United States.”[3]read more

This Threat is born out by Journalists being charged with Felonies from the protest i
Washington. Six journalists were arrested and charged with riotioing because they were covering teh riots.

The charges against the journalists — Evan Engel, Alexander Rubinstein, Jack Keller, Matthew Hopard, Shay Horse and Aaron Cantu — have been denounced by organizations dedicated to press freedom. All of those arrested have denied participating in the violence.

“These felony charges are bizarre and essentially unheard of when it comes to journalists here in America who were simply doing their job,” said Suzanne Nossel, the executive director of Pen America. “They weren’t even in the wrong place at the wrong time. They were in the right place.”[4] read more

This is an extremely dangerous sign, It singles a clear war on the media,This is right out of George Orwell's Fascism by the numbers, that is his political classic Animal Farm [5] Like animal farm hes changed all the messages he gave in the early days but so gradually his supporters never noticed. now America  is paying for the wall but Mexico will pay us back. He was going to make America great again hows he;s going to make America Safe again.

Trump wants to bring back torture, he claims to know better than the generals saying torture works, The CIA says it doesn't but what do they know? Only Trump really knows.[6] Specifically he wnats to bring back water boarding.

The CIA began using waterboarding, among other interrogation processes, after the attacks on New York and Washington in 2001.Al-Qaeda figures Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed were waterboarded dozens of times under CIA detention.A Senate committee concluded the technique did not provide critical intelligence, but some ex-CIA officials insisted it had provided actionable information.The technique is illegal. President Barack Obama banned torture as an interrogation technique in 2009.And late last year, an anti-torture amendment became law. It writes into the Army Field Manual that there can be no "cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment".Mr Trump can rewrite the manual but the law's stipulation that there can be "no use or threat of force" cannot be waived by executive order.Paul Ryan, speaking to reporters alongside Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, emphasised the Republican position, saying that "torture is illegal and we agree with it not being legal".

This is a ploy to make the bedrock right wing of Trump support feel secure, We'll teach those old Muslim's a lesson,The issue is to torture terrorists but since he is threatening to use martial law to reduce the murder rate in Chicago [7] how long will it be before he uses torture as a mainstay of American Jurisprudence? You might thing this is a slippery slope argument, Yet Trump is known for going to extremes.His political bread a better is based upon saying the unsalable doing the undoable., Going to extremes is his trademark. He's willing to charge journalists with felonies for rioting because they telling the truth about the riot, He wants to impose martial law to force Chicago to obey the law, Why would he not torturer Americans if he's willing to torture anyone? Moreover, perhaps he wont use torture in mainstream but what would stop him f from declaring protesters rioters and using it on them to silence decent? Even if he never get's that far how closemust we come before it;s too much?


Sources


all articles accessed 1/27/17

[1] Pema Levy, "Spicer Suggests Tighter Voting Restrictions as Solution to Nonexistant Voter Fraud," Mother Jones (Jan 25, 2017)
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/01/sean-spicer-voter-fraud-investigation-suppression

[2] Ibid

[3] Mirren Gidda, and Zach Schonfeld, "Donald Trump's thread to Press Freedom and Why it Matters," Newsweek. (Nov 12, 2016) Online copy URL
http://www.newsweek.com/2016-election-donald-trump-press-freedom-first-amendment-520389

[4]Jonah Engle Bromwich,  "Felony Charges for jornalists at Inauguration Protests Raise Fears for Press Freedom," New York Times, (jan 25,2017) URL
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/25/business/media/journalists-arrested-trump-inauguration.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0

[5] George Orwell Animal Farm Signet; 50th Anniversary edition (1996)

[6] BBC News "Donald Trump says he believes waterboarding works" BBC US ancdc Canada online, (26 January 2017) URL: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38753000

[7] Theodore Schleifer and Joshua Berliner, "Trump says he'll Send Feds into Chicago," CNN Politics
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/24/politics/donald-trump-chicago-carnage/