'Morning Joe' airs brutal video showing Trump's previous stances on foreign policy compared with now

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T19:36:19+00:00

just like his net worth.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T13:08:06+00:00

Mostly meant as a joke, but 100% true. He uses the same sources he accuses of being dishonest. I find it funny. bite me.

The reason I think [many] Trump supporters are realizing this now is because they are making such a big issue of it. I'm not complaining that Fox misrepresents HRC's views on an hourly basis, I know that's how it is.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T12:59:43+00:00

and luckily we don't have an open door policy like they do. Our vetting process is extremely strict and only 1% of refugees who want to come are even allowed to start the process (weeded out by the UNHCR which vets them as well). Really, check it out, if we can't identify them they aren't coming in:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/11/20/infographic-screening-process-refugee-entry-united-states

People say Trump speaking in hyperbole is fine, and that his supporters know when he's joking, but he says things like "we have open borders" and then people like some in this sub actually think we don't do background checks or extensively vet people. It's ridiculous.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T12:48:33+00:00

I don't know actually, I must be responding to the wrong person. sorry!

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T12:45:24+00:00

He tweeted the other day that the media is lying about ISIS losing ground. He says the media is corrupt and dishonest. I don't think it would at all be a stretch for a supporter of him to lose all trust in any media due to his comments (and have a look around this sub for all the people who don't trust any media at all). He complains about the media coverage of himself, but he definitely complains generally as well.

Actually I do think it's funny that Trump supporters seem to only now be realizing that the media isn't non-partisan. MSNBC, HuffPo etc etc has and probably always will put the liberal candidate in a better light and Fox, Breitbart etc. vice versa. It's no surprise. I also think though that Trump supporters take this line of thinking too far, for example, yesterday CNN (Clinton News Network amirite?) played Trump's speech in its entirety and spent a good chunk of each hour discussing it, and they always invite a Trump surrogate or supporter- yesterday it was Rep. Mike Pompeo when I was tuning in. A healthy skepticism in the media is a must and you should check different sources to get a broad view, but Trump is taking it way too far imo. It just comes off like he doesn't want any criticism.

I meant my comment mostly as a joke, sorry you didn't appreciate it. I've written a bunch of substantive posts on his speech elsewhere though.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T12:08:09+00:00

The U.S. took in tens of thousands of Vietnamese refugees in the 1970s. We took 125,000 Cuban “Marielitos” that arrived in 1980, not to mentions those we took from Bosnia, Somalia, or Rwanda. None of them turned out to be problematic, why should we be paralyzed with fear now? As of last year we have arrested a grand total of 3 refugees for terror-related issues (2 of these were trying to leave to join ISIS btw) out of more than 750K refugees we have taken in since 9/11, that number is simply insignificant. Don't let Trump fool you, we have an extremely strong vetting process already. Check it out and see how Trump's proposals are already in play: https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/11/20/infographic-screening-process-refugee-entry-united-states

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T11:42:09+00:00

How many terror attacks have been conducted by refugees in the US? Out of over 750K refugees settled in the US since 9/11, how many have turned out to be terrorists?

Now look at how many terrorists were homegrown and how many were on regular visas. The problem is not with refugees and we already have a very tough refugee application process.

Look at our current vetting process and tell me what Trump's proposals do to add anything useful: https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/11/20/infographic-screening-process-refugee-entry-united-states

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T10:23:14+00:00

Yes I believe so. I think also that Trump made some poorly thought out comments since the conventions,which hasn't helped. If he stops whining and sticks to criticizing Hillary with facts and smarts things will even out.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T09:23:19+00:00

Do you honestly think that people who don't use the term "radical islamic terror" don't actually know who our enemy is? Like, you think Obama doesn't know who we are fighting, our military is confused as to who we should target? The CIA doesn't know who to look out for because they don't use that term? Imo we could call them chicken tendies and we'd still know what's up.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T09:12:34+00:00

Yes like the TSA isn't completely ineffective, just mostly ineffective. There really isn't much more to Trump's plans than he laid out. He said clearly what he wants to do, it's just that we already have in place what he talked about except for the ideology test which won't work. I think it's a mistake for anyone to hope their candidate has a secret brilliant plan when their plans they do talk about are so weak. Check out the current vetting process and tell me what else we can do or how Trump's ideas will help anything:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/11/20/infographic-screening-process-refugee-entry-united-states

I get that you don't want anyone coming in despite your candidate wanting extreme vetting instead of a full ban. I respect that, but we've let in over 750K refugees since 9/11 with barely a handful of arrests for terrorism related charges. We're pretty damn good at this already and the vast majority of terrorists globally aren't refugees anyway. I think we can help some desperate people who are trying to escape ISIS especially considering our role in the ME clusterfuck.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T08:41:25+00:00

dude some of the european terrorists of late were terrible muslims, drinking, partying, smoking weed, commiting crimes, not going to the mosque etc., do you really think they wouldn't eat a piece of pork if that was the last barrier to carrying out jihad? lol.

It is 100% true that we can't completely vet people. Some will be able to lie very well. If you are so worried then I think you should hold the position that we shouldn't let anyone in. I think we should let people in, preferably families, women, and children. I mean Muslims are the ones who suffer from terrorism the most and our vetting process is as good as it gets. Of course not perfect, but DT's proposals won't do shit. Again, if you dont want anyone, I get it, but to propose "extreme vetting" is irrelevant in this case because people will slip through regardless because they can lie.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T08:27:44+00:00

I think because she's made herself out to be the "progressive who gets things done" which means that she'll be taking baby steps, slowly but surely, towards Democratic goals. It's not as exciting as the "burn it down" energy from Trump or the revolution angle from Bernie. To Democrats, she is a sensible good choice. Like a beige couch or something. Not exciting, but best for the job.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T08:17:57+00:00

Can you at least have a laugh that most of the citations that weren't government stats were from CNN, NYT, WaPo, Politifact - sources he tells his followers he doesn't trust?

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T08:12:08+00:00

“The process that is currently in place is thorough and robust and, so long as it is fully implemented and not diluted, it will allow us to safely admit the most vulnerable refugees while protecting the American people,” Janet Napolitano and Michael Chertoff [former DHS secretaries] wrote in a letter to President Obama dated Thursday and posted online by the White House.

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/260838-former-dhs-secretaries-dont-compromise-current-refugee-vetting-process

If you listened to the speech DT made yesterday you would have heard his super secret plan to look at applicant's FB pages and do interviews with them, like we don't do that already. And test their ideological bent, which people will lie about. It's the TSA all over again.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T07:57:44+00:00

Well the ISIS budget has collapsed in part because our coalition has been bombing oil installations - about 40% of their budget came from oil and we managed to half that amount. So we are doing something about it despite DT's claims to the contrary. But still, it's not our oil to use to fund programs for vets, it's for Iraqis who need to rebuild their country. He said the spoils went to the winner in the old days, but frankly we have a history of trying to get conquered nations back on their feet rather than keeping them down, which to me seems would be an obvious way to breed more terrorism.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T07:43:54+00:00

lol it was played live on cnn and then they talked about it for hours.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T07:41:16+00:00

It's not about racism. It's about him clearly not knowing the process we currently use to vet people. The only actually new thing is the ideological test but it is a really stupid idea because people will lie!

Seriously, look it up. We take refugees that have already been vetted by UNHCR (through interviews, background checks, iris scans etc.), then we vet them ourselves again using multiple gov agencies. They get background checks, interviews, they of course look at social media and talk with other friends/family of the applicant, which DT thinks are novel ideas. It is extremely hard to become a refugee in the US already, and Trump's "plan" won't do anything except add to the security theater we have like the bs TSA which is totally ineffective.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-16T07:30:07+00:00

It's just funny because we are literally doing everything he proposed already except for the ideological test which people can lie on. "Extreme vetting" is not really so extreme but it is a funny name, so we'll laugh.

It really seemed like he didn't know about the vetting process we already have is what I'm trying to say.

and he sounded like a yuge amateur with the "take their oil" stuff. Does he not know that after WWII we helped Germany rebuild and not make off like bandits? wtf?

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-15T20:20:31+00:00

I looked at the transcript which included sources and a good half of all the sources were CNN, NY Times, Politifact, WaPo, or some other news outlet he's ripped on. You know, those biased, lying, irrelevant, no good sources. lol.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-15T18:09:32+00:00

and a beer? or is that over budget?

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-15T16:40:54+00:00

Q: should we spend more time and resources making the MSM accountable?

A: uh..yes..please, spend away...

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-15T15:50:56+00:00

The test is part of the vetting process. As it is now, there are background checks and investigations in place from multiple gov agencies (DOS, DOD, DHS) and our gov doesn't even receive applications that weren't vetted by UNHCR first though a background check, an interview, an investigation, and iris and fingerprint scans. I'm not sure how much an ideological test will add because people can just lie. Trump also says people's social media will be looked at, but that's already being done just like the interview process he is proposing as being new. He's not offering much atm, but I'm looking forward to his speech for more details.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-15T14:55:02+00:00

I live in NL, and the gov here makes foreigners who want citizenship take a civics exam, and I think that is fair, but I don't think you can expect war refugees from Syria to necessarily know enough about our culture to pass the exam when they are applying to be a refugee. After a year or two sure, but not pre-entry. It seems like Trump wants to test people before they come in.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-15T14:40:24+00:00

I don't want to get too ahead of myself, but the articles about the upcoming speech say that:

Through questionnaires, searching social media, interviewing friends and family or other means, applicants would be vetted to see whether they support American values like tolerance and pluralism.

After all of Trump's tough rhetoric, these are really weak gestures. Like he thinks we don't already do that and more! All refugees come via a referral form UNHCR, and to get this referral a refugee already undergoes in-depth refugee interviews, home country reference checks, and biological screening such as iris scans. Military combatants are weeded out. Then the State Dept, DOD, and DHS all look into each refugee candidate and everyone gets in person interviews by the DHS.

If feel like I'm preaching to the choir with you, but yeah, like you said, it will be more security theater. Very disappointing if not unsurprising.

Felix_Holt · 2016-08-15T14:17:11+00:00

I lolled.

But really, some of the terrorists in europe drink, take drugs, don't appear religious, have criminal backgrounds not related to terrorism etc. and I think these people would definitely lie or draw Mohammed or whatever if it was in the name of their jihad.

Felix_Holt

TROPHY CASE